Hi, On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 04:13:00PM +0200, George Shuklin wrote: > It was fine and nice until I got a bug report that there is no > unattended-upgardes on our baremetal Debian, but there is one present in the > cloud image (we do also cloud computing).
The team making the installer and the team making the cloud image are known to have different opinions. > Given all that I came to ask for advice. Should we enable > unattended-upgrades in Debian for baremetal servers (the same way as it is > enabled for cloud VMs)? If you prioritise acting like Debian installer, then no. If you prioritise acting like cloud image, then yes. If your customers ask for them to be the same, then maybe. But then perhaps you have a larger documentation task in explaining how your Debian install diverges from a default net-installer install. > What is your opinion? Are there any guidelines or recommendations by Debian? I think the installer team already gave you their opinion by making the installer the way it is, and so did cloud image team. But pre-seeding exists for you to configure however you want, so it is not bad to diverge. It is your decision. I'm not one of your customers nor your staff that will handle support questions or have to write your documentation, so my opinion means very little to you. If I was one of your customers probably I would like to hear that the server install is very close to what I'd get with net-installer on defaults. On the other hand I would also suspect that the majority of people in the world who have ever used a remote Debian-like server in their lives did so via a cloud provider and so saw cloud image (of Ubuntu). Whether they understand that a Debian bare metal install would be intended to be different by Debian, is debatable. Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
