Re: [gentoo-dev] kerberos, virtuals, rattling cages

[Alec Warner]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
> here, so...)
>
> So I'm playing with net-fs/samba-4.0.3, AD and kerberos, and tried to
> enable kerberos system-wide on my server.
>
> No joy, as net-fs/nfs-utils has an explicit dependency on
> app-crypt/mit-krb5 (bug 231936) and net-fs/samba-4.0.3 depends on
> app-crypt/heimdal (for reasons noted in bug 195703, comment 25).

I'm not familiar with anyone using Kerberos on Gentoo. I use it on
Ubuntu; but we do not use it with Samba (or at least, if we do, I am
not aware of it.)

>
> Questions:
>
> 1) If upstream isn't going to support mit-krb5, then use of samba-4.0.3
> and kerberos demands that things with explicit dependencies on mit-krb5
> either be fixed or not used at all.

I'm fairly sure samba supports either kerberos implementation; is
there something that makes you think differently?

>
> I'm the first activity on bug 231936 in two years...could someone please
> look into that one?
>
> 2) Is it possible to slot mit-krb5 and heimdal instead of pulling them
> through a virtual? My suspicion is "no", but I don't know enough about
> kerberos to say whether or not it would work, even as a hack.
>

I'm not following you here. 'slot' means a very specific thing. You
are not actually suggesting we use SLOT, you simply want both versions
of the library to be installed in one ROOT?

I would not advocate this approach. You should strive to have only one
kerberos implementation on a given machine.

> I'm sure explicit dependencies on mit-krb5 and heimdal will continue to
> crop up, so (and forgive the nausea this might cause) it might help to
> slot mit and heimdal, and have virtual/krb5 depend on the presence of at
> least one.
>

It is likely that explicit dependencies are wrong, and are just bugs.

-A