Bug#1138002: marked as done (apt-daily: why wait for the upgrade?)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

------------=_1779875941-2352105-0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Your message dated Wed, 27 May 2026 11:57:08 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1138002: apt-daily: why wait for the upgrade?
has caused the Debian Bug report #1138002,
regarding apt-daily: why wait for the upgrade?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


--=20
1138002: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D1138002
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems

------------=_1779875941-2352105-0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 May 2026 08:50:14 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2024-03-25) on buxtehude.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.7 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	BODY_INCLUDES_PACKAGE,FOURLA,HAS_PACKAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
	SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 15; hammy, 140; neutral, 32; spammy,
	1. spammytokens:0.855-+--NEXT hammytokens:0.000-+--systemctl,
	0.000-+--H*RU:2003, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:2003,
	0.000-+--H*r:sk:p200300, 0.000-+--H*RU:sk:p200300
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: from mordac.selfhost.de ([82.98.82.6]:52477 helo=outgoing.selfhost.de)
	by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_SHA512__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wS9xt-009jqj-0C
	for [email protected];
	Wed, 27 May 2026 08:50:13 +0000
Received: (qmail 16487 invoked from network); 27 May 2026 08:50:06 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost.afaics.de) ([email protected]@62.158.110.141)
  by mailout.selfhost.de with ESMTPA; 27 May 2026 08:50:06 -0000
Received: from afaics.de (p200300e31f1f660288658ffffeb7694d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [2003:e3:1f1f:6602:8865:8fff:feb7:694d])
	by marvin.afaics.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPS id a436ccd3 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO);
	Wed, 27 May 2026 10:50:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (afaics.de [local])
	by afaics.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id e5bc08d2;
	Wed, 27 May 2026 08:50:05 +0000 (UTC)
From: Harald Dunkel <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: 
Subject: apt-daily: why wait for the upgrade?
Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 10:50:05 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Delivered-To: [email protected]

Package: apt
Version: 3.0.3

systemctl list-timers shows

% systemctl list-timers | egrep NEXT\|apt
NEXT                                  LEFT LAST                               PASSED UNIT                         ACTIVATES
Wed 2026-05-27 16:59:18 CEST            6h Tue 2026-05-26 23:21:00 CEST      11h ago apt-daily.timer              apt-daily.service
Thu 2026-05-28 06:54:07 CEST           20h Wed 2026-05-27 06:02:50 CEST 4h 36min ago apt-daily-upgrade.timer      apt-daily-upgrade.service

This looks weird. Even if apt-daily is run in 18h again, there
will be still a gap of 2 hours to running apt-daily-upgrade.
Why wait?

I would suggest to add

	[Service]
        ExecStartPre=/usr/lib/apt/apt.systemd.daily update

to the apt-daily-upgrade service to make sure the local index
files are up-to-date. The previous download of the packages
run by apt-daily might have failed (if configured).

------------=_1779875941-2352105-0
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Received: (at 1138002-close) by bugs.debian.org; 27 May 2026 09:57:18 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2024-03-25) on buxtehude.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.4 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
	DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FOURLA,
	FROMDEVELOPER,HAS_BUG_NUMBER,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 27; hammy, 150; neutral, 54; spammy,
	0. spammytokens:
	hammytokens:0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:stravin,
	0.000-+--H*RT:sk:stravin, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:311,
	0.000-+--H*RT:311, 0.000-+--H*RT:108
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: from stravinsky.debian.org ([2001:41b8:202:deb::311:108]:52676)
	by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wSB0n-009rZV-1g
	for [email protected];
	Wed, 27 May 2026 09:57:18 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debian.org;
	s=smtpauto.stravinsky; h=X-Debian-User:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:
	References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Cc:
	Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description;
	bh=x3uQ9Q7hR3wXijiZengEujIgiHBDXs+41tR2rMv6c48=; b=sDW5JL83Mj4CeyZ5PRr15jh+M0
	fuIMI2vH/+SI9vcjT345XSbxI9JCMpEGigKHmnqOmrKeNrAwCt8V855rW98zI8Bd7nYSghlyVotW1
	/mDVXuUY2GbG3RbQqd7WUKHr8zIQCKlE74HbJm5xfAlk8ME8BTz4qd9L9/w09WZ7kqad02pJDXk2T
	DkvZ5W3827uBrtdWxxvYt+f2ED/Af3ak5PjFi1Y/VE0OBNX+o3HJo3tv6ElXLYzguJ4SA1A4GtTdX
	1AOpCfkFVGkQjHaFCIVmCm5g/ToBdbLh1MfFqIRW76YnPKmqoSlKBmt4JxK3/6x9aKynrOEgc0dUa
	S+rKsNvQ==;
Received: from authenticated-user
	by stravinsky.debian.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256)
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1wSB0m-0033xb-1Z;
	Wed, 27 May 2026 09:57:16 +0000
Received: from jak-t14-g3 (unknown [IPv6:2a02:908:2812:e020:a9cb:b219:8b4e:4baa])
	by magenta.jak-linux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DFF47D1C4;
	Wed, 27 May 2026 11:57:14 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 11:57:08 +0200
From: Julian Andres Klode <[email protected]>
To: Harald Dunkel <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bug#1138002: apt-daily: why wait for the upgrade?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-GB, en-US, en
References: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
X-Debian-User: jak

On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 10:50:05AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Package: apt
> Version: 3.0.3
> 
> systemctl list-timers shows
> 
> % systemctl list-timers | egrep NEXT\|apt
> NEXT                                  LEFT LAST                               PASSED UNIT                         ACTIVATES
> Wed 2026-05-27 16:59:18 CEST            6h Tue 2026-05-26 23:21:00 CEST      11h ago apt-daily.timer              apt-daily.service
> Thu 2026-05-28 06:54:07 CEST           20h Wed 2026-05-27 06:02:50 CEST 4h 36min ago apt-daily-upgrade.timer      apt-daily-upgrade.service
> 
> This looks weird. Even if apt-daily is run in 18h again, there
> will be still a gap of 2 hours to running apt-daily-upgrade.
> Why wait?

upgrades run during a maintenance period of 6-7am, whereas
updates are spread over 24 hours to reduce mirror load.
-- 
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer                              i speak de, en
------------=_1779875941-2352105-0--