From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 665341FF171 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2024 15:29:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B0D051B0E0; Fri, 29 Nov 2024 15:29:27 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 15:29:24 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird From: Fiona Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20240909102050.40220-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20240909102050.40220-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.053 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 proxmox-apt-hook] initial commit X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Am 09.09.24 um 12:20 schrieb Fiona Ebner: > Many people will use 'upgrade' instead of 'full-upgrade' or > 'dist-upgrade' (e.g. [0][1]) despite the documentation explicitly > mentioning 'dist-upgrade' [3]. Proxmox projects use different > packaging guarantees than Debian (necessary for a rolling release > model) and using 'upgrade' can lead to the system being stuck on > outdated versions, or in rare cases, even break the system [2]. > > The match is kept simple, to not accidentally catch things like >> -o 'foo=bar upgrade baz' > and trip up advanced users. > > It does not catch invocations with '-y' either, making it less likely > to break automated user scripts. Although they should not use > 'upgrade' either, it still would be bad to break them. If the risk is > still considered too high, this change should wait until a major or > at least point release. > > To avoid false positives, it would be necessary to properly parse > options, which is likely not worth the effort. > > A downside is that the hook is only invoked after the user confirms > the upgrade and fetching the packages, but there doesn't seem to be an > early enough hook entry that provides access to the command line. > Since this is just an additional safety warning to guide new users, it > should still be good enough. > > It is intended that meta-packages for Proxmox projects recommend this > package. > > The same postinst/postrm logic for the hook like in proxmox-ve and > apt-listchanges is used to not have disable/re-enable the hook upon > removal/re-install of the package. > > [0]: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/150217/post-680158 > [1]: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/140580/post-630419 > [2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/Proxmox/comments/ujqig9/use_apt_distupgrade_or_the_gui_not_apt_upgrade/ > [3]: https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-sysadmin.html#system_software_updates > > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > --- > > Changes in v2: > * Mention that actual breakage is rare, being stuck on outdated > versions is much more common. > * Do not ask for confirmation, only log the warning. > * Split into own package, so it can be re-used by different products. Ping _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel