On 8 March 2016 at 05:24, Marco Ceppi <marco.ce...@canonical.com> wrote: > This is definitely more an operator decision than a charm decision. There > are two existing charms to address this. An unattended-upgrades charm and > landscape-client. Check those out first to see if the fit your needs. > > Marco
I've been toying with the idea of a package upgrade action in the apt layer. It would unhold held packages if necessary, set state giving your handlers the opportunity for pre/post upgrade hooks (like shutting daemons down and restarting them), run apt-get dist-upgrade, and rehold packages if necessary. This would require implementing action support into charms.reactive, which has been discussed a bit on github. Landscape takes care of most day to day updates, but the most important packages tend to get held to ensure unattended upgrades don't take down the service. > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016, 5:16 PM Mark Shuttleworth <m...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> >> On 07/03/16 13:29, Merlijn Sebrechts wrote: >> > What is your experience with upgrades. Do they have a tendency to break >> > things? Should this be enabled by default, added in as a configurable >> > switch or not added at all? >> >> In 16.04, if unattended-upgrades is installed you will by default get >> security updates automatically and can opt in to additional updates. >> Common practice is just to turn them on, with some percentage of >> machines also enabling the "proposed" pocket (where stuff goes before it >> gets to the updates pocket). Machines with "proposed" act as canaries >> for incoming updates. Security tends to land hard and fast because, >> well, security, but then it gets a lot more QA and the changes are >> generally tiny. >> >> Mark -- Stuart Bishop <stuart.bis...@canonical.com> -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
