Package Details: spideroak-one 7.5.0-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only)
Package Base: spideroak-one
Description: Secure file backup, sync and sharing client. This provides the client for SpiderOakONE.
Upstream URL:
Keywords: backup
Licenses: custom
Conflicts: spideroak, spideroak-beta
Provides: spideroak
Replaces: spideroak
Submitter: coolpyrofreak
Maintainer: coolpyrofreak
Last Packager: coolpyrofreak
Votes: 273
Popularity: 0.257952
First Submitted: 2015-07-18 19:17
Last Updated: 2019-02-15 03:12

Pinned Comments

coolpyrofreak commented on 2018-09-13 02:34

Upstream support for 32-bit on Linux has ended, so I'm removing it from the PKGBUILD. The article below has more information, and download links to the last 32-bit versions.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... Next › Last »

coolpyrofreak commented on 2015-09-08 13:56

@gumper - I still believe it's an upstream issue. I've experienced the same thing, but I haven't remembered to contact the vendor about it. Their support page is at

gumper commented on 2015-09-08 13:17

I'm currently seeing the same issue that Infinitezero had, when I have the backup frequency set to "automatic", SpiderOak will not find any changes.

I have to set the frequency to one of the time selections in order for it to find the changes.

His fix was to create the package using the deb file from Spideroak, but the current PKGBUILD is already doing that.

Any suggestions on how to correct this issue?

k2s commented on 2015-08-19 23:36

new version 6.0.1 here

k2s commented on 2015-08-19 23:36

had to update for x86_64: 7baa2573756ce174fbdff882be21de2306580de12d31cf760b706da72efdb711

cb474 commented on 2015-07-28 17:48

Thanks coolpyrofreak. Seems to have updated fine. Though I am not a fan of the new interface.

coolpyrofreak commented on 2015-07-19 01:43

@cb474 - I set the PKGBUILD for this to conflict with the original spideroak package, so pacman should prompt you to remove spideroak before installing spideroak-one. Based on my experience, it should be a seamless transition and you shouldn't lose anything, but YMMV.

cb474 commented on 2015-07-19 01:02

So when I install this will it automatically replace 5.2 from old AUR? Do I have to uninstall 5.2 first? Am I going to lose my settings and have to set up SpiderOak all over again?

Thanks for any details on that.

And thanks for maintaining and upgrading the package.

coolpyrofreak commented on 2015-07-18 19:21

SpiderOak 6.0 is out, and this is a pretty major upgrade. Besides a new UI, new features, and bug fixes, SpiderOak has changed the name of this product (and the name of the binary) to SpiderOakONE to differentiate it from their Groups and Enterprise products. I'm changing the name of the package to spideroak-one to keep in line with this convention, and will merge the existing package to it.

Groups or Enterprise would have to be a separate PKGBUILD, with the source obtained from SpiderOak directly. For both of those, some signup and interaction with the SpiderOak sales team is necessary before you can get the install file.

In a minor change, I've changed the install file to the .deb file in order to clean up the PKGBUILD. It should build the same without any issues. I've also removed the CLI link from the install file and replaced it with the link to the release notes.

Please let me know if you have questions. My email is in the PKGBUILD. Thanks!

coolpyrofreak commented on 2015-05-21 22:33

@infinitezero Still sounds like an upstream issue to me. Either SpiderOak needs to rebuild the RPM source, or you need to recompile the PKGBUILD. I don't intend to be rude, but I don't really want to re-write the PKGBUILD for the .deb source just because one user is having an issue.

infinitezero commented on 2015-05-20 17:51

I did, see part of their response below.

"The errors I was seeing were indicating that the process which scans your file system was crashing. There are differences in the libraries used by the rpm vs deb builds which caused the directory watcher to crash."