On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 08:15:33PM +, b. f. wrote:
> What incompatibilities exist between that latest versions of the MIT
> Kerberos and Heimdal implementations? How does des@ feel about it,
> since libpam and openssh may have to be altered?
My experience is a few years old, but last time I tr
>I would love for it to go away entirely, and those base-system
>components that depend on it to learn how to use either Kerberos
>implementation from ports. (I'd also love for the ancient and broken
>base version of libcom_err to go away -- there's no knob to turn it
>off, and the shared library
On 06/06/10 12:46, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
... and it's not going to get any better till someone steps up and
volunteers to improve it. Can we count on you?
I've brought this up at least three times over the past 10(+?) years,
and been blown off every time. So yes, I'm volunteering, again.
Gr
... and it's not going to get any better till someone steps up and volunteers
to improve it. Can we count on you?
I've brought this up at least three times over the past 10(+?) years, and
been blown off every time. So yes, I'm volunteering, again. Can I count on
you?
--lyndon
___
On 06/06/10 12:32, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
Beyond that, Free is one of the few UNIXen I cannot talk to (or from!)
using Kerberos for things like SSH, rlogin, rdist, etc. We're woefully
behind Solaris, Linux, even Windows, when it comes to integrated
GSSAPI/K5 SSO authentication.
... and it's no
(And yes, this is a bit of an irony considering that I used to be the
maintainer of the base-system Kerberos code in the long-ago krb4
days. But my job requires me to administer MIT Kerberos, so I need
the MIT kadmin utility and not the Heimdal one.)
Aren't the reasons for the Heimdal distribut
