Re: Interest in packaging GNU Shishi and GNU Generic Security Service?
"J. Bruce Fields" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 09:32:58AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> I expect the initial packaging to be simple, it is just a './configure
>> && make install' package. Part of the 'make install' procedure should
>> be duplicated in the apt install scripts, for the KDC side, but that
>> part is not important. I think it is more important to simply get the
>> library and binaries packaged. How to better co-exist with MIT and
>> Heimdal is something that will need to be figured out along the way.
>> If there is interest in the idea, improving the GSS library to be able
>> to dlopen the MIT or Heimdal GSS libraries is an idea I have been
>> playing with. Then Debian packages (like gsasl, fetchmail, curl,
>> mailutils, etc, that support GSS) would only have to be linked with
>> GNU GSS, and the user can, during run-time through a configuration
>> file, decide which actual implementation should be used. GNU GSS
>> would then merely be a shim between MIT, Heimdal or Shishi. Then
>> enabling GSS in more packages would be simpler, without having a
>> strong dependency on just one of MIT, Heimdal or Shishi.
> Have you looked at the libgssapi package at
> http://www.citi.umich.edu/projects/nfsv4/linux/ ?
> Currently we're just using this for the NFS rpcsec_gss implementation,
> but we split it out into a separate library thinking it might be used as
> you describe above.
I've seen it now, although it wasn't available when I created my GSS
implementation back in 2003. Certainly co-operation would be good,
and it looks like we have similar goals. But GSS is a GNU project so
it would require the normal copyright assignment procedure.