Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:42:48 -0800 From: Gordon M Tetlow <tetlowgm@mac.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Should libgssapi be hidden behind the MK_KERBEROS knob? Message-ID: <B6258346-EB1D-451B-9D71-6497F3781344@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20071208163857.GC91919@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <4759DC08.9070600@FreeBSD.org> <20071208163857.GC91919@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 8, 2007, at 8:38 AM, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 03:49:28PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
>> If there is a better list for this, don't hesitate to let me know.
>>
>> I use WITHOUT_KERBEROS=true in /etc/{make|src}.conf, since I don't
>> need or use it. However, this leads to a problem with building the
>> kdelibs3 port. The configure script looks for the presence of
>> libgssapi and the associated headers, and takes that to mean that
>> kerberos is available, and sets things up accordingly. This causes
>> the build to fail when it tries to actually link something to a
>> kerberos library.
>>
>> I realize that GSS can be used for other things besides kerberos, but
>> are we really losing anything by hiding them both under the same
>> knob?
>> If the answer to that is yes, is there any objection to a WITHOUT_GSS
>> knob?
>
> We wouldn't loose anything today, but a without GSS knob makes more
> sense to me. There's at least one other GSS system in fairly wide use
> in the high performance computing world today.
How about WITHOUT_KERBEROS implies WITHOUT_GSSAPI unless people
specifically ask for GSSAPI? Is that too obscure?
-gordon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B6258346-EB1D-451B-9D71-6497F3781344>