With respect to the local provider, I had always intended there to be a command in the local provider plugin (which is currently empty) that updates the template image.
Tim On 02/07/14 08:22, Marco Ceppi wrote: > I actually don't see a problem with removing apt-get upgrade, but what > apt-get update? It's only 20s user time according to the original post. > For stale cloud images, local provider and manual, it's just a no brained. > > Marco > > On Jul 1, 2014 4:04 PM, "David Britton" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Matt Bruzek > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > Hello Andrew, > > I ran into a problem when Juju was no longer calling "apt-get > update". I filed bug: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1336353 > > > Agreed -- I've fixed this "problem" multiple times in charms by > making the first step apt-get upgrade. Which always seemed a bit > wasteful to me. :) > > It happens more on the local provider since those images are copied > from templates which are not rebuilt until you remove them (do > lxc-ls --fancy to see them). So, the templates package cache goes > out of date, and your cloned machine also goes out of date. > > -- > David Britton <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > > > -- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
