On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
> > On 01/16/2014 08:01 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us <mailto: >> t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: >> >> Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net <mailto:mag...@hagander.net>> >> >> writes: >> > One thing I noticed - in MSVC, the config parameter "krb5" >> (equivalent of >> > the removed --with-krb5) enabled *both* krb5 and gssapi, and >> there is no >> > separate config parameter for gssapi. Do we want to rename that >> one to >> > "gss", or do we want to keep it as "krb5"? Renaming it would break >> > otherwise working environments, but it's kind of weird to leave >> it... >> >> +1 for renaming --- anybody who's building with "krb5" and >> expecting to, >> you know, actually *get* krb5 would probably rather find out about >> this >> change at build time instead of down the road a ways. >> >> A compromise position would be to introduce a gss parameter while >> leaving >> krb5 in place as a deprecated (perhaps undocumented?) synonym for it. >> But I think that's basically confusing. >> >> >> Yeah, I'm not sure it actually helps much. >> >> >> Andrew - is this going to cause any issues wrt the buildfarm, by any >> chance? >> >> > None of my Windows buildfarm members builds with krb5. Mastodon does, > although it seems to have gone quiet for 16 days (Dave - might be worth a > check). Probably the result of renaming krb5 would be just that the build > would proceed without it. From memory I don't thing the config settings are > sanity checked. > > (We need some more, and more modern, Windows buildfarm members.) > Thanks, pushed with the rename. That'll keep things less confusing going forward at least :) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/