On 11/12/2023 06:12, Charles Curley wrote:
Sorry. I had already stopped the apt-daily-upgrade.timer, which
triggers the unattended upgrade service. (The couldn't give them
similar names to act as a mnemonic?) This refers to disabling the
unattended upgrade service.
I have not tested it, but fr
Dan Ritter wrote:
> Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> On my trusty Thinkpad X30, upgrades are sufficiently taxing that having
>> them run unexpectedly can be a real problem, so I tried to prevent
>> unattended upgrades a few months ago.
>
>
> I have always preferred the apticron package, which by default
>
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 17:27:39 -0500
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >
> > Thanks. I will disable as well.
>
> Disable *what*? Disabling a .service unit which is triggered by a
> timer event isn't going to stop it from running.
Sorry. I had already stopped the apt-daily-upgrade.timer, which
triggers t
On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 02:10:43PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:51:48 -0600
> David Wright wrote:
>
> > I think it might be worth googling and reading "three levels of off"
> > (with the quotes).
> >
> > 1. You can stop a service. That simply terminates the running
> >
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:51:48 -0600
David Wright wrote:
> I think it might be worth googling and reading "three levels of off"
> (with the quotes).
>
> 1. You can stop a service. That simply terminates the running
> instance of the service and does little else. If due to some form
> o
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> On my trusty Thinkpad X30, upgrades are sufficiently taxing that having
> them run unexpectedly can be a real problem, so I tried to prevent
> unattended upgrades a few months ago.
I have always preferred the apticron package, which by default
updates daily and sends an e
On Sun 10 Dec 2023 at 13:39:50 (-0700), Charles Curley wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:17:36 -0600
> David Wright wrote:
>
> > Why is the service loaded, enabled and enabled then? Don't you need
> > to disable or mask it? Presumably it sits there, dead, all day
> > normally, and pops up at an app
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:17:36 -0600
David Wright wrote:
> Why is the service loaded, enabled and enabled then? Don't you need
> to disable or mask it? Presumably it sits there, dead, all day
> normally, and pops up at an appropriate time.
As I understand things, start and stop are for immediate c
On Sun 10 Dec 2023 at 11:00:37 (-0700), Charles Curley wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 16:11:44 +
> Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d...@ewoof.net> wrote:
>
> > On 10 Dec 2023 08:49 -0700, from charlescur...@charlescurley.com
> > (Charles Curley): [...]
> >
> > Exactly how did you "shut down" unatte
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 23:59:04 +0700
Max Nikulin wrote:
> On 10/12/2023 22:49, Charles Curley wrote:
> [...]
>
> systemctl status apt-daily-upgrade.timer
>
root@issola:~# systemctl status apt-daily-upgrade.timer
● apt-daily-upgrade.timer - Daily apt upgrade and clean activities
Loaded: l
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 16:11:44 +
Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d...@ewoof.net> wrote:
> On 10 Dec 2023 08:49 -0700, from charlescur...@charlescurley.com
> (Charles Curley): [...]
>
> Exactly how did you "shut down" unattended-upgrades?
>
root@chaffee:/etc/dhcp# systemctl stop unattended-upgrade
> I double checked this morning. All machines had unattended upgrades
> shut off as of yesterday evening, well before the
> unattended-uogrades ran.
On my trusty Thinkpad X30, upgrades are sufficiently taxing that having
them run unexpectedly can be a real problem, so I tried to prevent
unattende
On 10/12/2023 22:49, Charles Curley wrote:
root@issola:/var# systemctl status unattended-upgrades.service
systemctl status apt-daily-upgrade.timer
On 10 Dec 2023 08:49 -0700, from charlescur...@charlescurley.com (Charles
Curley):
> Due to the recent traffic about the defective kernel in Bookworm
> (12.3), I shut down unattended-upgrades on all my machines (Bookworm
> and Bullseye). To my surprise, three of them ran unattended-upgrades
> anyw
Due to the recent traffic about the defective kernel in Bookworm
(12.3), I shut down unattended-upgrades on all my machines (Bookworm
and Bullseye). To my surprise, three of them ran unattended-upgrades
anyway.
One of them is Bullseye, so it was a harmless error. But still….
The two Bookworm mach
15 matches
Mail list logo
