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>