Origin pattern is unexpected on dpkg-reconfigure

Bug #1577215 reported by Mark Shuttleworth on 2016-05-01
38
This bug affects 5 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu)
Low
Unassigned
Xenial
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

In testing out the new unattended-upgrades behaviour I was asked an unexpected question about the "unattended-upgrades Origin-Pattern". This is not a great experience, it doesn't match anything other than internal code patterns.

For example, the default offered does NOT look like a sensible Ubuntu default for Ubuntu users:

  "origin=Debian,codename=${distro_codename},label=Debian-Security";___

Is that correct, or a mistake?

What I would expect is simply this:

 Install security updates (Y/N)
 Install performance and reliability updates (Y/N)
 Install updates from unofficial archives (Y/N)

The latter would map to all PPAs etc.

Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Iiro Laiho (iiro) wrote :

The questions don't even seem to affect everything. Maybe they should be disabled altogether.

Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack) wrote :

Confirmed that in bionic it offers this Origins-Pattern in the "Configuring unattended-upgrades" debconf question:

"origin=Debian,codename=${distro_codename},label=Debian-Security";

That should be Ubuntu, or ${distro_id} perhaps. That being said, it doesn't seem to be used in the end, because my 50unattended-upgrades file has no mention of Debian and uses ${distro_id} everywhere.

Jan Claeys (janc) wrote :

Also, what about the other settings (e.g. package blacklist) in that file? Does/should it preserve those, warn about overwriting them, ...?

Balint Reczey (rbalint) wrote :

The pattern is not used, I already scheduled a commit to drop the question even in Debian:
https://github.com/rbalint/unattended-upgrades/commit/00eed46d48b316ff3dca153f3f676586ef5f4173

Changed in unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Low
Balint Reczey (rbalint) wrote :

With the fix for this bug I'm dropping the clearly obsolete question, but IMO adding different questions would confuse less experienced users.

I think power users who can cope with regressions caused by packages from sources coming from sources not allowed by unattended-upgrades by default should be able to change the u-u configuration file - or add new configuration files overriding default values.

Optionally updating packages automatically from PPAs or unofficial sources would be indeed be a feature that could be made available in an easier way, but I think it would be better to track this potential improvement in a separate bug.

Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

This bug was fixed in the package unattended-upgrades - 0.99ubuntu2

---------------
unattended-upgrades (0.99ubuntu2) bionic; urgency=medium

  * Run upgrade-between-snapshots only on amd64.
    The test exercises only unattented-upgrade's Python code and uses
    dependencies from the frozen Debian snapshot archive thus running
    it on all architectures would provide little benefit.

 -- Balint Reczey <email address hidden> Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:41:20 +0700

Changed in unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu):
status: Confirmed → Fix Released

Hello Mark, or anyone else affected,

Accepted unattended-upgrades into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unattended-upgrades/1.1ubuntu1.18.04.7~16.04.0 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested and change the tag from verification-needed-xenial to verification-done-xenial. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed-xenial. In either case, without details of your testing we will not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s) fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in -proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

Changed in unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu Xenial):
status: New → Fix Committed
tags: added: verification-needed verification-needed-xenial
Łukasz Zemczak (sil2100) wrote :

Hello Mark, or anyone else affected,

Accepted unattended-upgrades into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unattended-upgrades/1.1ubuntu1.18.04.7~16.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested and change the tag from verification-needed-xenial to verification-done-xenial. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed-xenial. In either case, without details of your testing we will not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s) fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in -proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers