Shawn Walker wrote: > Ethan Quach wrote: >> Shawn Walker wrote: >>> There's also the issue of compatibility within pkg(5) itself. >>> pkg(5) currently isn't guaranteed to be backwards compatible; that >>> is, an image created with a newer version of pkg(5) won't >>> necessarily work correctly with an older version of pkg(5). >> >> That's good to know. This is probably implied but I'll ask for >> completeness - is the reverse supported? > > I'd have to say that should always be the case. I'd consider it a bug > otherwise (specifically, that a newer client should always be able to > use/update an older client's image). > > However, once a newer client is used with an older client's image
even when through -R ? -ethan > , there are no guarantees the older client will be able to use that > image anymore. > > Cheers,
