'HomeAssistantCore.update' blocked from execution, system is not healthy

Configuration
61

Hi. I have the same issue, problem with docker. I removed the portainer and now system is ok. Update from 2022.10.2 to 2022.10.3 is successfull.

62

The second linked pr is about the new auto update feature. It has nothing to do with unhealthy check. Updates have always been blocked when the system is deemed to be unhealthy. I don’t even know how long ago that was added. This pr in November 20202 added the job infrastructure and it included an unhealthy check that blocked updates. So it’s at least that old.

The only thing new here is the first PR you linked. That’s what added portainer to the “unhealthy images” list.

Incorrect. Running a container which is not supervisor or something started by supervisor is not supported. However running container orchestration software like portainer marks the system as unhealthy since it starts other containers and can change almost anything about docker in ways that break supervisor. Portainer isn’t the only one, the list of container orchestration software that has come up in issues and now marks the system as unhealthy is here:

63

But isn’t the unsupported state should be considered for issues?

Also Portainer isn’t provided as a Community Add-on?

64

Can anybody tell me why Home Assistant wants to block portainer? Never hat a problem with it…

65

same question. seems to come with the latest supervisor update

66

Now I could solve it.

sudo docker stop portainer
sudo docker restart hassio_supervisor

But this is an error, isn’t it? I don’t see a reasonable sense why portainer should be a party crasher. Issue, ok. But an error?

1 Like
67

let the people decide if portainer is an issue or not. To be honest, this seems to me too strict.
It was running for years and now I’m not able to update anymore

4 Likes
68

Just read this thread…

Still I think this change misses the target, I assume that the unhealthy/unsupported info is to tell users if you don’t run HA according to official configuration you won’t get support, right?
Blocking HA from execution is another thing, you stop users from doing stuff they want to do, even if they are well aware they’re doing it at their own risk and they won’t be eligable for any kind of support.
There’s probably going to be a lot of complaints about this.

12 Likes
69

don’t need to remove portainer.
sudo docker stop portainer
sudo docker restart hassio_supervisor
Update HA and then you can start portainer again
(sudo docker start portainer)

21 Likes
70

ah, thanks for the hint

71

Thanks, I’ve updated my post.

1 Like
72

here is another workaround

4 Likes
73

Also, no need to reboot host,
sudo docker restart hassio_supervisor
is enough.

1 Like
74

…now updating. Evien with docker 20.10.5 (dont need to meet docker 20.10.17 for healthy from docs).

Clearly Portainer was the issue HA was having for this update. I will start portainer as soon as I finish my updates. Never have a problem with it.

docker container list
(my portainer image alias was agitated_johnson)

docker container stop agitated_johnson
docker container restart hassio_supervisor
(back to HA and update)
docker container restart hassio_supervisor
docker container start agitated_johnson

2 Likes
75

Ok, updated it again. Thought I tried that, but I might be wrong. Thank you again :slight_smile:

76

Was deprecated from the list of community addons a long time ago. Because it was a source of tons of issues in the HA repos. Where users used it to get in strange configurations and then reported issues when things didn’t work. Hence the unhealthy check.

77

This works, but also if we’re just going to do this anyways, why block us from using Portainer in the first place? For anyone who doesn’t know what Portainer is, they’re not even going to know how to find this thread 9 times out of 10 as the error message just says ‘Docker’. It doesn’t even say ‘Docker Orchestration Software’ to be a bit more insightful. It seems like a rushed decision by management on this one.

5 Likes
78

Yes, you do know I completely agree with you?
You did read my earlier post?

Whole thing doesn’t make sense, people will understand that they won’t get any support if they start making changes. Doing things this way will make some people stay away from HA.
It’s not a commercial product, no need to harden the software like this. (or are they preparing for some kind of commercial launch…?)
We should start some kind of vote for having this change revoked!

10 Likes
79

Sorry Nikler, I know you agree / I was agreeing with you. My comment was more to the mods instead of you so I probably shouldn’t have quoted you. Sorry about that. I 100% agree we should have a vote on revoking this.

80

You’re wrong, they don’t. There’s issues all the time from people with systems that tell the user they are unsupported or unhealthy who still expect support. Let alone systems that aren’t given this designation.

People assume that if something did work it should keep working, regardless of what it is or how they did it. The fact that it was never supported in the first place frequently doesn’t seem to register, its apparently always the fault of the update :man_shrugging:

Portainer was particularly problematic. Not only did it expose so many options that could break the system, it used to be an addon the community repo and there’s still people running that addon. Which means people running it may have had no idea they were unsupported. Not to mention the software itself is now woefully out of date with no updates ever coming.