Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/security/openssh+gssapi
To: James Chacon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jim Wise <email@example.com>
Date: 08/01/2003 17:19:35
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, James Chacon wrote:
>If you don't want kerberos why would you build this package in the first
A bulk build on a platform without kerberos (or without pkgsrc support
for kerberos) comes immediately to mind -- and setting PKG_SKIP_REASON
if kerberos is not present deals with that case just fine.
If kerberos is present, I agree that setting KERBEROS= if it is not set
is perfectly reasonable within this package for the reasons you mention
>It's specifically the kerb patches in here folks want so obviously that
>kinda implies the need to define it all correctly.
>(and for a bulk build I really shouldn't have to enable the package per se. it
>should just build).
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, James Chacon wrote:
>>>Module Name: pkgsrc
>>>Committed By: jmc
>>>Date: Fri Aug 1 03:21:03 UTC 2003
>>> pkgsrc/security/openssh+gssapi: Makefile
>>>This needs to define KERBEROS or the section which adds the right libraries
>>>never gets included and nothing links.
>>That's a good question -- normally, this package should build with
>>krb support if KERBEROS is defined, and without it if it isn't (though I
>>agree that the latter case was broken).
>>OTOH, I agree that it doesn't make any sense to build this package
>>without KERBEROS support.
>>Perhaps a PKG_SKIP_REASON setting if kerberos is not present would make
>> Jim Wise
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (NetBSD)
>>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----