On Monday 06 February 2017 18:24:38 Mart van de Wege wrote: > Lisi Reisz <lisi.re...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Monday 06 February 2017 13:54:11 Brian wrote: > >> On Mon 06 Feb 2017 at 13:19:00 +0000, Patrick Schleizer wrote: > >> > The unattended-upgrades was not installed on my Debian jessie system. > >> > After upgrading to Debian stretch, the package unattended-upgrades got > >> > installed. 'reverse-depends unattended-upgrades' [1] did not make me > >> > any wiser. There must be a gap of my apt knowledge. Can anyone shed > >> > light on this please? > >> > >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/11/msg00117.html > > > > Can it cope with a back-log? Has anyone tried? > > We use it in production at work. Yes, it can, *provided* you don't have > any config file changes. That, it can't handle.
That is very reassuring. Do you feel like sharing your config file? > And forgive me a bit of a rant: it's a stereotypical Ubuntu hack job: > inefficient, chokes on fairly standard deviations from the norm and > badly documented. This is what I was rather afraid of. And I have not found <https://wiki.debian.org/UnattendedUpgrades> reassuring, but I note that it is nearly a year out of date. I am hoping that now it is a default in new installations, the config file is basically usable as a default as it stands. > I agree with the developers' sentiment that automatic upgrades are a > good thing, but I really think Debian could have cooked up a better > script than !@#$% 'unattended-upgrades'. I agree with the sentiment expressed later that I ought to write my own if I don't like what is offered, but I am after a reasonably safe way of getting some fairly urgent security upgrades, and future urgent security upgrades, done pending my coming to grips with ssh-ing in. As a speaker at my local LUG helpfully said the other day, it is the router that is the problem. Yes, I know that it is the router that is the problem. The trouble is, it *is* the problem!! Lisi