[Slackbuilds-users] Heads-up: rdiff-backup update to 2.0.5 - Incompatible with 1.2.8

[Ricardo J. Barberis]

El 2021/03/21 15:01, B Watson escribió:
> On 3/21/21, Ricardo J. Barberis <ricardo at palmtx.com.ar> wrote:
>> Hello all!
>> 
>> A few days ago I was asked to update rdiff-backup from 1.2.8 to 2.0.5,
>> but this two versions are incompatible if used remotely (e.g., via 
>> ssh)
>> so you have to keep both client and server at the same version.
>> 
>> Since this changes are somewhat invasive, I'd like to ask opinions
>> before submitting my updates to SBo:
> 
> I never used rdiff-backup or even heard of it, so I don't know the
> answer to this: Are there going to be enough people who won't/can't
> upgrade (e.g. due to corporate policy) that will be stuck with servers
> running the old version?

I'm not sure, I've been its maintainer for a very short time only.
Let's see what other people on the list say about this :)

 From what I gather at repology.org most of the newer distros (like 
Fedora, Arch and even CentOS/EPEL 7/8 and Windows!) are already on 2.x 
but others like openSUSE 15.2/15.3, Debian stable and Ubuntu 18.04 are 
on 1.x still.


> If that's real concern, you could provide a rdiff-backup-legacy-client
> build. Just the client of the 1.2.8 version, with a different filename
> (so it doesn't conflict with the regular 2.0.5 build).
> 
> That way people who use rdiff-backup with multiple remotes will be
> able to keep working with all of them, instead of being stuck with
> half the remotes running 1.x and half running 2.x.

There is no client/server separation, it's the same "binary", but making 
a "-legacy" package would be no problem as both versions can work with 
librsync 0.9.7 or 2.3.0 (so I could even postpone librsync's update).


>> Should I submit them or should I wait for Slackware 15.0 instead?
> 
> If you actually do decide to provide a 1.2.8 client-only build,
> I don't see a reason not to go ahead and do it.

Thank you so much for your input!
-- 
Living la vida Linux!