From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep  8 16:07:24 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FEB16A4BF
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon,  8 Sep 2003 16:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hueymiccailhuitl.mtu.ru (hueytecuilhuitl.mtu.ru
	[195.34.32.123])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EAF043FF5
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>;
	Mon,  8 Sep 2003 16:07:20 -0700 (PDT)	(envelope-from sem@ciam.ru)
Received: from ciam.ru (ppp138-3.dialup.mtu-net.ru [62.118.138.3])
	by hueymiccailhuitl.mtu.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8F2B2FA1F1; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 03:07:17 +0400 (MSD)
	(envelope-from sem@ciam.ru)
Message-ID: <3F5D0BA5.8040003@ciam.ru>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 03:07:17 +0400
From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@ciam.ru>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030827
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cykyc@yahoo.com
References: <20030908151226.98548.qmail@web40701.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030908151226.98548.qmail@web40701.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: pam_krb5 port question
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:07:24 -0000

Jon Passki wrote:
> Is there any reason why the port is mainly focused for MIT Kerberos
> and not Heimdal?

KRB5_IMPL=heimdail didn't help? If so, it'll be great if you fix this 
and send a patch to the port maintainer.

-- 
Sem.