Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 21 Aug 2022 12:29:55 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 265651] [NEW PORT] archivers/zpaqfranz: versioned/snapshot archive
Message-ID:  <bug-265651-7788-uQHw2I8DJt@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-265651-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-265651-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D265651

--- Comment #26 from Felix Palmen <zirias@freebsd.org> ---
(In reply to Franco Corbelli from comment #25)
> Why have different versions?=20
> Because of bugs and [...]
> sometimes (not always) the archived files are no longer restorable in Ubu=
ntu (!)
Sounds horribly weird. :o

But doesn't sound like a reason to have multiple ports for multiple versions
(which would be the only way to support having multiple versions installed =
from
ports/packages). After all, that's not a problem with backwards compatibili=
ty,
but indeed, as you say, with bugs.

But if things like this happen, providing a "portable" binary (statically
linked) for "rescue" purposes (probably outside of ports) sounds like a good
idea!

> I will update the port-proposal with your suggestions (no -static,
> yes symlink etc)
> Work in progress.

Thanks, looking forward to commit it!

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-265651-7788-uQHw2I8DJt>