From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Jan 10 06:16:44 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A182BCA9867 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 06:16:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from svysh.fbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oi0-x236.google.com (mail-oi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 660431058 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 06:16:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from svysh.fbsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-oi0-x236.google.com with SMTP id u143so126886535oif.3 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2017 22:16:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Fmjj1pviPsSWaZ6Np+UHp1KK0GQVNO5xyHDlB2jpRpU=; b=jBYYvs+qijy+o3TdgBfxD4XZteNLrarj8aRh+4o8L0Xps8v+ioD34UWhjjMPWuo2Rc M/a+gSN4uSIze2VNEdY+m/EfL2/hnybq9lwYdlytUIL3EAF4eQw/7xNUY3fM00G/UytP d0Q4QmLXd85+lPCs3JwuPJx9HndpSSOmS6sj6wSy1feKEyGnLPpeN5ZzWlBkxy+FVGfb OBBw3uryD8eRwVDZd0HR5yKWumivlZ+esUGLmiCh3L3fcaaBPW3u0YG0OmPGTXsU1tkO rtG5ACjJsNrXiNwVeFSAZSkltP6VXwS88kTWiFE3kWcNldNKLPiAtdL8iZicEhrJRsOg 1wGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Fmjj1pviPsSWaZ6Np+UHp1KK0GQVNO5xyHDlB2jpRpU=; b=scAhPQB4IacmjedQuKGczhsEszXKBYzNV5yBgOqEuSowc94xNnZ2lW9v66Tmy6V+cb AMVOH0Cd4xQzKkLJOWT10QuSPl902MXiQb1s8kiDJUUP31Uy/JzV8j5uNPmKSjrNfOa8 KhO0r0F8jcVNlsawwwhdBSiPUEeTMLg71bg4oRB0lackNUS9+d2kCekKiPG8UtNjh42W H5TFyJV9p+YSFwXAS+QoXYjYbTG9lTt86YHqeM0EVdHRUg41StRhihQwGeMkTgPqePXp vFvKgjOnww9yC7O3387AsVphQ0arPypcMXXHC9QTWH1AXY4R1tWFHiCxXB6l8p+Yvmie arLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIBNT2RO3MlANCg9ETfRQwruWtUSU0LXJ3mqyMdGH0fA8T94+VcYIy5VBbwkADUwfy+1lvILHhkpmD4nQ== X-Received: by 10.157.32.17 with SMTP id n17mr719129ota.123.1484029003854; Mon, 09 Jan 2017 22:16:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.66.212 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:16:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <587414A3.1010206@quip.cz> References: <34b66662-a2d7-706d-3653-e0ffc9bf81b2@rlwinm.de> <5874135B.4000900@quip.cz> <587414A3.1010206@quip.cz> From: Sergei Vyshenski Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 09:16:43 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: openldap-client vs openldap-sasl-client To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: Jan Bramkamp , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 06:16:44 -0000 Edemic enforcement of unwanted security technologies propagates further on. Port net/p5-perl-ldap requires port security/p5-Authen-SASL, which by defaul turns ON kerberos support. This brings situation, when private key infrastructure (PKI) software by default depends from Kerberos, which is as if: nginx depends from apache. Cf PR here: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215835 Regards, Sergei On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:54 AM, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: > Miroslav Lachman wrote on 2017/01/09 23:48: > >> Jan Bramkamp wrote on 2017/01/05 11:30: >> >>> On 04/01/2017 18:32, Andriy Gapon wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Do you I understand correctly that it is impossible now to install >>>> both samba44 >>>> and libreoffice using the official FreeBSD package repository? >>>> Or samba44 and KDE? >>>> >>>> If yes, then that sucks... >>>> >>> >>> Yes and yes it sucks. The "solution" is to build your own repo and set >>> the right flags to always use the same LDAP client port. With binary >>> packages and the speed of modern x86_64 systems I for one no longer see >>> removing SASL support from OpenLDAP as useful enough to justify the >>> complexity. Are there any reasons other than saved build time to disable >>> this dependency (e.g. a bad security track record/process, different >>> licenses)? >>> >> >> And what is the right way to choose SASL / NON-SASL version globaly? >> We are building packages in our poudriere, but I cannot find the proper >> variable / option for this. >> >> Miroslav Lachman >> > > I don't need SASL for LDAP client, but somebody messed up ports tree with > WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL which is for users and not maintainers: > > # WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL > # - User-defined variable to depend upon > SASL-enabled OpenLDAP > # client. Must NOT be set in a port > Makefile. > > So why it is set there > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/databases/ldb/Makefile > ?r1=430417&r2=430416&pathrev=430417 > > and there > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/net/samba43/Makefile? > r1=429692&r2=429691&pathrev=429692 > > and maybe in some other places > > Miroslav Lachman > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >