I tried to talk to some people on the discord to shine some light on this “issue”.
So I share the log from the conversation here.
You can also find it on the discord channel Home Assistant -> #homeassistant_supervised
discord log
johnjohnToday at 3:07 PM
What is the reason for auto-update of the supervisor is mandatory?
What goes wrong if the update is blocked when everything else is being kept at the same version? (By blocked I mean by some kind of intervention from me)
cogneatoToday at 3:09 PM
Supervisor is managing which versions of what things as far as the ecosystem goes. So blocking it will prevent update notifications for HA, addons, the OS (only HA OS)
You can block it.
johnjohnToday at 3:11 PM
@cogneato Ok, but it won’t be a problem blocking the auto-update of hypervisor when I don’t want to update anything else?
cogneatoToday at 3:12 PM
It won’t be a problem if you keep yourself informed
Everything will work as is
johnjohnToday at 3:15 PM
Ok, than why is this not an easy option to stop the auto-update (with a notice that this causes a stop in all update notifications)? The reason I ask is that some informed people don’t want to have to troubleshoot the updated hypervisor when they are away or don’t want to be trouble by it. (And this is of course only when the auto-update fails or creates another problem with the newly installed hypervisor)
TinkererToday at 3:17 PM
Probably because too many folks would disable it, then complain later when things no longer worked…
johnjohnToday at 3:19 PM
But the only thing that stops working is the:
Supervisor is managing which versions of what things as far as the ecosystem goes. So blocking it will prevent update notifications for HA, addons, the OS (only HA OS)
@cogneato
If I understood correctly
johnjohnToday at 3:27 PM
I’m just thinking about that more and more systems are getting more important in a home, so an option to disable a auto-update in a “production-system” is a very normal thing to do. Or maybe a warning that one should use a different system, like @Frenck mentioned, docker. (But that is a different story)
Cause bad updates happen.
These are just my thoughts.
johnjohnToday at 4:04 PM
@cogneato @Tinkerer
I will leave the question about auto-update. But thank you for the replies you gave! (Not sarcastic, I understand some things are difficult/not worth (or whatever reason) to explain to a “noob”)
TinkererToday at 4:04 PM
I don’t run this method myself, so all my knowledge is Nth hand
cogneatoToday at 4:05 PM
@johnjohn an option to stop auto-updates is something that is “on the list”
LudeeusToday at 4:06 PM
really?
cogneatoToday at 4:06 PM
well…not a high priority list
LudeeusToday at 4:06 PM
can we remove it?
cogneatoToday at 4:06 PM
just something to be considered as far as I can tell
LudeeusToday at 4:06 PM
I vote
johnjohnToday at 4:07 PM
@Ludeeus what are your reasons?
LudeeusToday at 4:07 PM
That is what ensure that the system is up to spec
johnjohnToday at 4:07 PM
After you read what wrote
TinkererToday at 4:07 PM
If you want full control, don’t use #homeassistant or #homeassistant_supervised
Use #homeassistant_container or #homeassistant_core
LudeeusToday at 4:08 PM
TinkererToday at 4:08 PM
You’re trying to turn something intended to self manage, and break that part…
johnjohnToday at 4:09 PM
Then it comes back to the information given when choosing a installation. Since the homepage is saying “Open source home automation that puts local control and privacy first.”
And it has been stated that pausing/blocking the auto-update does not break anything.
cogneatoToday at 4:14 PM
@johnjohn it doesn’t instantly break anything
cogneatoToday at 4:15 PM
local control is in reference to controlling smart devices locally. There are all sorts of excepetions there and completely dependent on what you choose to use
johnjohnToday at 4:17 PM
Yeah I understand the statement on the homepage is not something I can “use” for good effect, just wanted to push that angle.
I understand it doesn’t break something instantly.
Maybe it could be that when you pause the auto-update and then choose to un-pause and update 3 months later that could require some more logic that could cause something to break?
If not, then I don’t see why this could be an option like joining the beta channel. No sane normal-user would do that.
TinkererToday at 4:19 PM
You say that…
Spend more time here, you’ll soon reset what sane people do
johnjohnToday at 4:20 PM
In good hope, but then you at least have a troubleshooting question to help.
TinkererToday at 4:20 PM
As I said, this is not the method if you want full control of it
LudeeusToday at 4:20 PM
If it is a option, there will be YT vids and “guides” that instruct you to disable it.
Then the user does it, have no idea why, other than “some guy said it”, and have no clue as to why stuff are not working/breaking
TinkererToday at 4:20 PM
And that is why this method was deprecated
Because too many guides written by uninformed folks helped others build broken systems
johnjohnToday at 4:22 PM
I think that is a weak argument looking at other solutions and where guides tell this and that.
But that is just my though!
I think it is enough for now about this topic. Thank you all for your replies!