Re: RFC: drop kerberos4-support?
>>>>> "Andreas" == Andreas Barth <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Andreas> Hi, while my regular "clean up RC-bugs"-work I noticed
Andreas> that the package krb4 is RC-buggy in more than one
Andreas> way. On further investigation, I also noticed that
Andreas> kerberos 4 is dying right now, and also that the bugs are
Andreas> not as easy to fix. Also, upstream doesn't look too
Andreas> active according to http://www.pdc.kth.se/kth-krb/. For
Andreas> this reason, I started to consider to push dropping of
Andreas> the krb4-package from unstable. This has some influence
Andreas> on the heimdal-package, and also on the release notes for
Andreas> migration issue. However, I personally tend to go that
Andreas> way. Please see bug #315059 for some discussion;
Andreas> especially, heimdal in experimental stopped to depend on
Andreas> kerberos 4.
Not only that, but it conflicts with key krb4 libraries (libroken and
Andreas> Well, my question is simple: should I push packages to go
Andreas> away from kerberos-4-support? Unless there is a good
Andreas> reason to do not, I would start to push into that
Andreas> direction. And of course, feel free to send me things
Andreas> that need to be changed. As usual, the maintainers have a
Andreas> special say in everything (that's why I Cced them). :)
Ideally I thin the krb4 maintainer should have same say.
However I haven't heard from him.
I think there several things I want to do before uploading Heimdal to
unstable as it is in experimental:
* Find out what packages will break.
* Find out what packages will still be broken even after recompiling.
* Find out what is required to keep AFS support working (assuming I
don't already have it).
Brian May <email@example.com>