On Wed, 09 Jul 2025 23:28:03 +0200, Stuart Henderson <stu.li...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > > On 2025-07-09, Kirill A Korinsky <kir...@korins.ky> wrote: > > On Wed, 09 Jul 2025 22:54:50 +0200, > > Stuart Henderson <stu.li...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > >> > >> - restore (and archive browsing) on OpenBSD is more annoying than it could > >> be if we had a fuse implementation that was a bit more compatible with > >> current versions on other os. > >> > > > > It has a fork with name rustic which has interactive mode to navigate inside > > snapshots, and webdav. > > not a fork, it's different software written in a different language though > using a compatible repo format. > > "rustic currently is in beta state and misses regression tests. It is > not recommended to use it for production backups, yet." > > https://rustic.cli.rs/docs/comparison-restic.html > > restic development: "conservative with changes" (which I agree with from > experience) is a good state for backup software. > > rustic: "moving fast, add new features early" ... > > I wouldn't use it for backups yet though maybe worth a look for use as a > restore tool. There is also https://github.com/emuell/restic-browser. >
Yeah, "fork" defently a bad word here. I'd like to add this explanation about "beta status": https://github.com/rustic-rs/rustic/discussions/1459#discussioncomment-13071763 -- wbr, Kirill
