Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 18:46:37 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 277650] Remove supporting linking against Heimdal from base (GSSAPI_BASE) Message-ID: <bug-277650-7788-SDWn3tOShZ@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-277650-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-277650-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D277650 Siva Mahadevan <me@svmhdvn.name> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |me@svmhdvn.name --- Comment #8 from Siva Mahadevan <me@svmhdvn.name> --- I'd also like to follow along and understand the decision to switch base kerberos to MIT; more specifically, why base kerberos is desirable at all. = Is there ongoing discussion on the choice to continue including kerberos in base?How many users are depending on base kerberos as it stands, since base Heimdal is 12+ years old? For the applications that enable kerberos support (e.g. sshd, , why not force users to build those applications from ports and set the corresponding OPTIONS to enable GSSAPI/kerberos support? As I understand it, both Heimdal and MIT kerberos are third-party projects. This would also remove maintenance burden of vendor imports of newer kerberos versions in the future. I'm personally content with choosing my preferred vendor of kerberos through ports. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-277650-7788-SDWn3tOShZ>