Subject: Re: European domestic
To: Johan Danielsson <>
From: Jan-Hinrich Fessel <>
List: current-users
Date: 09/16/1997 08:25:05
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

In message <>you write:
> Jan-Hinrich Fessel <> writes:
> > Please have a short look at it and tell me if there is a problem
> > with that because I used some Makefiles that inadvertedly fell into
> > my hands.
> Where does the code come from? The $NetBSD$ tags (and the Berkeley
> copyright) suggests that this is code that has been exported (by
> someone) from the US.

I assume you mean crypt.c with code?
The readme explains how it was done, i.e. patch in the appropriate things into 
crypt.c.  Should I mention there that the original exportable crypt.c is in 
lib/libcrypt and that the euro.patch.crypt.c is also located there? assured the code was made in Europe, and next time he is 
around I will ask him who made the code.

> The problem is not obtaining the source, the problem is obtaining 100%
> untainted source.

Given that Andrew's statement is true, the code is intainted.
The only thing that may be tainted are the Makefiles with the $NetBSD$ tag.

> As far as I know, the `domestic' kit contains Kerberos 4 stuff, and
> patches to various programs (like ed and init). All of this is
> available to anyone, and I see no good reason (apart from the required
> work) not to use these replacements.

Yes.  ed and init do have the hooks, and so there is the appropriate flag set 
in the appropriate Makefile.  Basically, the only thing missing is kerberos 
and( libdes).

You mention all of this is available to anyone.  Yes.  But it's work to 
integrate.  And I do think it would be nice to integrate that into European 
trees.  Do you know of a complete drop-in kerberos?

Is there an overview what is in the domestic tree in the US?


 					Tragbar ist, was nicht herunterfaellt.


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

Version: 2.6.3i