SVI/ProxmoxVE
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/community-scripts/ProxmoxVE.git synced 2026-05-11 18:52:12 -04:00
Code Issues 2.6k Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Non-Interactive Update Option (update -y) #1141

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-11-20 05:05:12 -05:00 by saavagebueno · 4 comments
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:05:12 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @AdnerVL on GitHub (May 20, 2025).

🌟 Briefly describe the feature

Add non-interactive updates to PVE Helper-Scripts

📝 Detailed description

I propose adding a non-interactive update option, such as update -y, to the PVE Helper-Scripts. This would automatically select "YES (Silent Mode)" (Option 1) in the update menu, streamlining maintenance for users managing multiple LXC containers.

💡 Why is this useful?

Efficiency: Simplifies batch updates across containers.
User Control: Maintains security by requiring explicit command invocation.
Consistency: Aligns with common CLI conventions (e.g., apt-get -y).

Originally created by @AdnerVL on GitHub (May 20, 2025). ### 🌟 Briefly describe the feature Add non-interactive updates to PVE Helper-Scripts ### 📝 Detailed description I propose adding a non-interactive update option, such as update -y, to the PVE Helper-Scripts. This would automatically select "YES (Silent Mode)" (Option 1) in the update menu, streamlining maintenance for users managing multiple LXC containers. ### 💡 Why is this useful? Efficiency: Simplifies batch updates across containers. User Control: Maintains security by requiring explicit command invocation. Consistency: Aligns with common CLI conventions (e.g., apt-get -y).
saavagebueno added the enhancement label 2025-11-20 05:05:12 -05:00
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:05:12 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@MickLesk commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025):

Nope. Thats not the Goal.

@MickLesk commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025): Nope. Thats not the Goal.
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:05:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@AdnerVL commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025):

Thanks for reviewing the request. Could you share why it doesn't fit the project's goals? This would help me align future suggestions

@AdnerVL commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025): Thanks for reviewing the request. Could you share why it doesn't fit the project's goals? This would help me align future suggestions
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:05:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@MickLesk commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025):

The whole topic has already been addressed several times. It is basically quite simple to explain

  1. as long as there is no snapshot option, it is fatal
  2. automatic updates of entire apps could destroy something at any time. (network problems, npm, pnpm etc. pp).
  3. there is no rollback mechanism

Conclusion: our repo is flooded with issues because most users are not tech savvy enough to understand what the problem is. (80% of the current issues are pure network problems which then destroy LXC's). And in addition, we have 340 scripts that have to be constantly scanned to see if there are any breaking changes. We also have no infrastructure to keep every LXC running permanently in order to possibly test the function with every update. Ultimately, we are only volunteers and the number of PRs from others is negligible (unfortunately), we simply cannot guarantee that.

Alternative:
Everyone can have a look at the App.sh and build a cronjob based on the update_script part, which reproduces the desired behavior.

@MickLesk commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025): The whole topic has already been addressed several times. It is basically quite simple to explain 1) as long as there is no snapshot option, it is fatal 2) automatic updates of entire apps could destroy something at any time. (network problems, npm, pnpm etc. pp). 3) there is no rollback mechanism **Conclusion**: our repo is flooded with issues because most users are not tech savvy enough to understand what the problem is. (80% of the current issues are pure network problems which then destroy LXC's). And in addition, we have 340 scripts that have to be constantly scanned to see if there are any breaking changes. We also have no infrastructure to keep every LXC running permanently in order to possibly test the function with every update. Ultimately, we are only volunteers and the number of PRs from others is negligible (unfortunately), we simply cannot guarantee that. **Alternative:** Everyone can have a look at the App.sh and build a cronjob based on the update_script part, which reproduces the desired behavior.
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:05:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@AdnerVL commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025):

I understand, the alternative sound good, hope to see it in the near future, Thanks

@AdnerVL commented on GitHub (May 20, 2025): I understand, the alternative sound good, hope to see it in the near future, Thanks
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
🛑 Failure to comply with the guidelines
breaking change
bug
bug
bugfix
deferred
delete script
dependencies
enhancement
external
feature
github
help wanted
Implemented in VED waiting push to Main
in project pipeline
invalid
investigation
json
maintenance
new script
new script
nice to have
not a script issue
not planned
organization
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
refactor
rename script
security
update script
website
wontdo
No Label enhancement
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
saavagebueno
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: SVI/ProxmoxVE#1141
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?