tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Removing Kerberos IV support



CMU & MIT still have their zephyr servers up. So does Iowa State, for what it's worth. And there are a couple of others that mine are connected to.

-Tracy

On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 1:25 PM, David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 02:23:13PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
 > > Why don't we mark it BROKEN now (for this coming branch), delete krb4
 > > whenever, and remove it after the next branch if nobody fixes it? I
 > > don't expect anyone will but you never know.
 >
 > Right now, with krb4, I think it works.   So it's really
 > marking-broken/deleting when krb4 is removed.

Well, saying it's broken because it depends on krb4 seems perfectly
reasonable :-)

But, since the goal is to summon anyone who's actually using it,
marking it broken early seems like a better approach. Of course,
updating it seems better still.

 > It seems we are leaning to removal rather than marking BROKEN for things
 > that aren't super likely to get fixed, because the history is there
 > anyway and in this case the new upstream version of zephyr has changed a
 > fair bit anyway.

Once it's removed, it gets forgotten, though. So I guess in general it
depends on the extent to which we care whether it never comes back.
And I suppose in this case while zephyr used to be fairly important,
it probably isn't any more. Does it still get used to any extent at
MIT?

--
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index