From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jun 16 11:48:09 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA11674 for current-outgoing; Fri, 16 Jun 1995 11:48:09 -0700 Received: from grunt.grondar.za (grunt.grondar.za [196.7.18.129]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA11655 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 1995 11:47:49 -0700 Received: from grumble.grondar.za (grumble.grondar.za [196.7.18.130]) by grunt.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA24771; Fri, 16 Jun 1995 20:47:27 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumble.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA14596; Fri, 16 Jun 1995 20:47:25 +0200 Message-Id: <199506161847.UAA14596@grumble.grondar.za> X-Authentication-Warning: grumble.grondar.za: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: "Rodney W. Grimes" cc: mark@grondar.za (Mark Murray), FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.Org (FreeBSD current) Subject: Re: DES, crypt and eBones Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 20:47:25 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.Org Precedence: bulk > I disagree. eBones was to and does replace the 4.4BSD lite supplied > Kerberos tree. I can use ``secure'' without eBones at all. If you > bundle the two into one tree it is going to complicate things like > sup targets, source tree management in src/Makefile, etc. OK - I'll buy this. How would you then solve the problem of something currently sitting in secure that needs bits of eBones and vice versa? For example, in secure sits telnet[d] with obvious Kerberization. > Binary sets should match source sets, otherwise you are heading for > trouble :-(. I'd buy this if there was not so much crosstalk between the packages. Solutions? One possible one is to move libraries to secure? (yuk) M -- Mark Murray 46 Harvey Rd, Claremont, Cape Town 7700, South Africa +27 21 61-3768 GMT+0200