To what extent is rustic aiming to be cli (or API) compatible with restic? #1109
Replies: 1 comment
-
Thanks for opening this discussion @garethgeorge Generally, CLI compatibility with restic is not a goal even though many things work pretty similar or equal. For a feature comparison, see https://rustic.cli.rs/docs/comparison-restic.html. I would advise to use the APIs provided by the crates About API-stability: We don't guarantee API-stability at the moment as we are still in an early phase. So far, the crates are not used by many other crates and we would like to adapt things once there are more users and API-improvement-requests reach us. (You are also very much invited to propose changes if you find some things non-optimal!) That said, there are many functionalities which are already pretty stable and where I don't expect major changes w.r.t the functionality. About the specific functionality: general/progress:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi! Backrest author here (see backrest. I've gotten a few feature requests re: supporting rustic, I'm reaching out to understand what this project's road map looks like and , in particular , to what extent operational preserving a similar interface to restic is a goal.
My main questions are:
The important commands Backrest uses are:
restic snapshots
to index the contents of a repository.My most likely pathway to rustic support would probably be creating an FFI bridge from Go to Rustic's Rust API. I'd aim to wrangle rustic's output into a shape that looks a lot like what I'm getting from restic today. All of my Go code for doing this today lives in here but my understanding is that rustic is available as a crate -- so I should be able to statically link it rather than spawning a binary?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions