[Bug 613001] Review Request: heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Bug 613001 depends on bug 692606, which changed state. Bug 692606 Summary: Use alternatives to allow for heimdal packaging https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692606 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |EOL -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-06-29 23:06:01 --- Comment #73 from Ken Dreyer --- Thanks Christopher for the correction. The package is built in Koji and present in updates-testing / epel-testing. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=18703 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #72 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: Heimdal - |Review Request: heimdal - |Alternative Kerberos|Alternative Kerberos |implementation |implementation --- Comment #71 from Christopher Meng --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: heimdal Short Description: Alternative Kerberos implementation Upstream URL: http://www.h5l.org/ Owners: ktdreyer Branches: f19 f20 el5 el6 epel7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #70 from Christopher Meng --- Shouldn't it be packaged as heimdal? Upstream tarball name: http://www.h5l.org/dist/src/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #69 from Ken Dreyer --- Thanks very much for the review! I've updated the package restrict xinetd to EL5 and EL6. EL7 and Fedora will only support systemd https://gitorious.org/ktdreyer/heimdal-packaging/commit/5b650861858c503b914100af9a2c66df7091d4ed New Package SCM Request === Package Name: Heimdal Short Description: Alternative Kerberos implementation Upstream URL: http://www.h5l.org/ Owners: ktdreyer Branches: f19 f20 el5 el6 epel7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #68 from Orion Poplawski --- Looks good. Approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #67 from Orion Poplawski --- We're going to need xinetd still on <=EL6, so I'm fine with either keeping it for now and then migrating to systemd sockets after import, or adding the systemd socket stuff now with conditionals in the .spec file. Up to you as to how you want to maintain the spec file across the branches. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001
--- Comment #66 from Ken Dreyer ---
Upstream fixed a large bug in the krb5-config utility so I'm updating the Git
snapshot again to the tip of 1.6.
I've taken your advice and installed login.users(5) into the regular place and
removed ftpusers(5) from the package altogether. With these changes, we can
avoid shipping %{_mandir}/%{name} entirely.
Thank you for catching heimdal-klist breaking. I've fixed that in Patch0. It's
small enough that I'm comfortable carrying that one in Fedora.
Thanks also for catching the kadmind bug with systemd. I've fixed that in
Patch6 and submitted it upstream.
I'm a bit hesitant to remove xinted altogether since Alexander put so much work
into repairing those bits of the packaging, and I suspect that a number of
sites use it. However, I haven't heard from Alexander in a while, and I
completely agree that systemd should be the option that we promote going
forward. Unless I hear screams I'm going to remove xinted per your suggestion,
especially for the platforms that are already have systemd (ie RHEL 7 and
Fedora).
* Fri May 30 2014 Ken Dreyer -
1.6.0-0.5.20140529gitddde77b
- Update git snapshot to latest tip of heimdal-1-6-branch
- Use /sbin path in %%pre/%%post scripts for EL6 and EL5
- Install login.users(5) normally, since it doesn't conflict with anything
(RHBZ #613001)
- Don't ship ftpusers(5) (RHBZ #613001)
- Patch heimtools to deal with the commands' "heimdal-" prefixes (RHBZ #613001)
- Use "simple" systemd service type for kdc, kadmind, kpasswdd
- Add "--detach" flag in heimdal-ipropd-slave-wrapper to match the systemd
forking service type
- Patch kadmind to handle systemd's restrictions on setpgid() (RHBZ #613001)
Exact changes in Git:
https://gitorious.org/ktdreyer/heimdal-packaging/commit/d337a86fc85ea554ee55616870aab9df9cef0114
Spec URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal-1.6.0-0.5.20140529gitddde77b.fc21.src.rpm
F21 scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6913952
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #65 from Orion Poplawski --- Also, the xinetd stuff should be replaced with systemd configs. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #64 from Orion Poplawski --- # systemctl start heimdal-kadmind Job for heimdal-kadmind.service failed. See 'systemctl status heimdal-kadmind.service' and 'journalctl -xn' for details. May 28 12:25:30 barry heimdal-kadmind[26305]: heimdal-kadmind: setpgid: Operation not permitted -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #63 from Orion Poplawski --- Great, looking good. (In reply to Ken Dreyer from comment #62) > A couple of comments on the remaining rpmlint issues: > - rpmlint found a dangling-symlink, but I don't see how this could be the > case, > since it Requires: pam, which Provides the symlink destination, > /etc/security/access.conf. Yeah, rpmlint can't figure this out, so it warns about the possibility. > - invalid-locale-man-dir - this is a result of putting the man pages in a > "heimdal" subdirectory so they don't conflict with existing man pages in > other packages. I see two of these: # ls /usr/share/man/heimdal/man5/ ftpusers.5.gz login.access.5.gz ftpusers is essentially a duplicate of ftpusers(5) from man-pages, so I would contemplate just not shipping it. I can't find a login.access man page anywhere else, so it seems like that could be installed normally. I think there are problems with the heimdal-klist and heimdal-kswitch symlinks. Looks like heimtools does not recognize those names and so is asking for a command as if you ran "heimtools" directly: $ heimdal-klist klist, list klist kgetcred kgetcred kswitch, switch kswitch kvno kvno copy_cred_cache copy_cred_cache help, ? help [command] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001
--- Comment #62 from Ken Dreyer ---
Here's the new version. This should address the issues in comment #58 (along
with other fixes).
* Thu May 22 2014 Ken Dreyer -
1.6.0-0.4.20140522git229d8c7
- Update git snapshot to latest tip of heimdal-1-6-branch
- Drop upstreamed text-fx patch
- Install Texinfo files (RHBZ #613001)
- Add Provides: heimdal-static to -devel subpackage (RHBZ #613001)
- Drop %%defattr (RHBZ #613001)
- Add text content to kadmind.acl to help users (and remove a zero-length file)
- Install profile.d scripts with non-executable permissions
- Remove .la files
- Patch to remove AC_PROG_LIBTOOL macro
- Reload xinetd when using systemd
- Require logrotate and setup, since we drop config files into directories that
these packages own.
- Add unowned Heimdal directories in %%files
- Replace "heimdal" with %%{name} in %%files
- Do not BR libcap-ng-devel on EL5
Exact changes in Git:
https://gitorious.org/ktdreyer/heimdal-packaging/commit/720db3876630945b2841b354d798827c2ace43df
Spec URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal-1.6.0-0.4.20140522git229d8c7.fc21.src.rpm
F21 scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6894313
A couple of comments on the remaining rpmlint issues:
- rpmlint found a dangling-symlink, but I don't see how this could be the case,
since it Requires: pam, which Provides the symlink destination,
/etc/security/access.conf.
- invalid-locale-man-dir - this is a result of putting the man pages in a
"heimdal" subdirectory so they don't conflict with existing man pages in
other packages.
- Some files have non-standard-dir-perm or non-readable settings. These files
should only be readable by root, so it's ok to ignore rpmlint warnings about
these.
- The /etc/heimdal-slaves file is zero-length because there's no content to add
to it by default. (Deleting the file from the package would leave a dangling
symlink in /var/heimdal.)
- The devel-file-in-non-devel-package warnings are because Heimdal has plugins
that look like shared libraries.
- The explicit-lib-dependency error with heimdal-path is a false positive:
heimdal-path requires end-user binaries, not shared libaries that could be
autorequired. The cleanest solution is to just Require: heimdal-libs.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #61 from Michael Schwendt --- > %defattr() isn't needed even in EL5. More precisely: not for Fedora koji based EL5 builds and not for recent EL5 dist releases either, but only for older 5.x releases. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #60 from Orion Poplawski --- (In reply to Ken Dreyer from comment #59) > We kept %defattr() because we were going to support EL5. I'm on the fence > about supporting EL5 now, but let's keep it in for now. %defattr() isn't needed even in EL5. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #59 from Ken Dreyer --- Thanks very much for the review. I'm working on addressing the issues you mentioned. We kept %defattr() because we were going to support EL5. I'm on the fence about supporting EL5 now, but let's keep it in for now. I'll post an updated package in the next couple of days. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|or...@cora.nwra.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #58 from Orion Poplawski --- I'm still getting sporadic test failures building on my machine, but other builds seem fine, so I'm going to hope for the best. Issues: === - Permissions on files are set properly. Note: See rpmlint output See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions - Texinfo files are installed using install-info in %post and %preun if package has .info files. Note: Texinfo .info file(s) in heimdal-libs See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Texinfo - Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: heimdal-devel. Does not provide -static: heimdal-devel. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries - Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) Note: heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libasn1.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libgssapi.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libhdb.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libheimbase.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libheimntlm.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libhx509.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkadm5clnt.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkadm5srv.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkafs.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkdc.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkrb5.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libotp.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libroken.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libsl.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/libwind.la heimdal-libs : /usr/lib64/heimdal/windc.la See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries - Drop %defattr() Rpmlint --- heimdal-workstation.x86_64: E: missing-call-to-setgroups /usr/libexec/kfd heimdal-workstation.x86_64: E: missing-call-to-setgroups /usr/libexec/popper heimdal-workstation.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man8/heimdal-kadmin.8.gz 119: warning: macro `Q1' not defined heimdal-appl-clients.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /etc/login.access /etc/security/access.conf heimdal-appl-clients.x86_64: E: invalid-locale-man-dir /usr/share/man/heimdal/man5/login.access.5.gz heimdal-appl-servers.x86_64: E: invalid-locale-man-dir /usr/share/man/heimdal/man5/ftpusers.5.gz heimdal-server.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/heimdal 0700L heimdal-server.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/heimdal-kadmind.acl 0600L heimdal-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/heimdal-kadmind.acl heimdal-server.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/heimdal heimdal-server.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/logrotate.d/heimdal heimdal-server.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/heimdal-slaves 0600L heimdal-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/heimdal-slaves heimdal-server.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/heimdal-kdc.conf 0600L heimdal-server.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/heimdal 0700L heimdal-server.x86_64: W: non-standard-dir-in-var heimdal heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libasn1.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkrb5.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: E: postin-without-install-info /usr/share/info/hx509.info.gz heimdal-libs.x86_64: E: postin-without-install-info /usr/share/info/hx509.info.gz heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkdc.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkafs.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libheimntlm.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libhdb.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libroken.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libsl.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libotp.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libgssapi.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libhx509.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkadm5clnt.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libheimbase.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: E: postin-without-install-info /usr/share/info/heimdal.info.gz heimdal-libs.x86_64: E: postin-without-install-info /usr/share/info/heimdal.info.gz heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libwind.so heimdal-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/heimdal/libkadm5srv.so heimdal-devel.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/ma
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #57 from Ken Dreyer --- (In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #56) > So, I did a local build of this on my F20 box and it failed running the > tests. I notice that configure picked up a few extra things on my local > build: Thanks a lot for investigating this. > +checking for CAPNG... yes > > > BuildRequires: libcap-ng-devel I've added this in. > -checking for crypto library... included libhcrypto > +checking for crypto library... libcrypto > > So, what to do here. Somehow I missed that heimdal's libhcrypto is a SSL > reimplementation, and can be swapped out for openssl. It also appears to be > the user of libtommath. Do we want to use libhcrypto or openssl? Wow, I totally missed this. You're right. I was missing BR: openssl-devel, and the build system wasn't erroring when I used --with-openssl. Now that I've added the BR, libhcrypto (including libtommath) is not present. I haven't tested the OpenSSL backend myself, but the test suite passes at least. That simplifies things from Fedora's perspective. > +checking db.h usability... yes > +checking db.h presence... yes > +checking for db.h... yes > +checking for db_create... yes, in -ldb > > > BuildRequires: libdb-devel (instead of db4-devel) Great catch again. That explains the mystery of why the otp utilities were only building on RHEL 6. I've adjusted the package to use libdb-devel on Fedora and db4-devel on RHEL 6. > +checking whether to enable OTP library... yes > > This comes from having libdb. > > Other missed items: > > checking for libintl... no > > Not sure why it isn't finding this. I can't even find a package that ships libintl.so. I guess Red Hat gettext doesn't have this. > My rawhide build with this failed with: > Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: >/usr/bin/otp >/usr/bin/otpprint >/usr/share/man/man1/otp.1.gz >/usr/share/man/man1/otpprint.1.gz > > Which look to be a little too generic. You're right. Once I sorted out the libdb-devel situation I can package those files on both Fedora and RHEL. Here's the new version: * Tue Apr 29 2014 ktdre...@ktdreyer.com - 1.6.0-0.3.20140429gitd60ba47 - Add BR libdb-devel on Fedora (RHBZ #613001) - Add BR openssl-devel and libcap-ng-devel (RHBZ #613001) - Only set BuildRoot on el5 - Alphabetize non-conditional BuildRequires - Remove duplicate BR openldap-devel Exact changes in Git: https://gitorious.org/ktdreyer/heimdal-packaging/commit/f90e6ff63adad6303174fb27405e0834f30234ae Spec URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal.spec SRPM URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal-1.6.0-0.3.20140429gitd60ba47.fc21.src.rpm F21 scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6797256 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #56 from Orion Poplawski --- So, I did a local build of this on my F20 box and it failed running the tests. I notice that configure picked up a few extra things on my local build: +checking lex library... -lfl +checking whether yytext is a pointer... yes Does not appear to be used though +checking for CAPNG... yes > BuildRequires: libcap-ng-devel -checking for crypto library... included libhcrypto +checking for crypto library... libcrypto So, what to do here. Somehow I missed that heimdal's libhcrypto is a SSL reimplementation, and can be swapped out for openssl. It also appears to be the user of libtommath. Do we want to use libhcrypto or openssl? +checking db.h usability... yes +checking db.h presence... yes +checking for db.h... yes +checking for db_create... yes, in -ldb > BuildRequires: libdb-devel (instead of db4-devel) +checking whether to enable OTP library... yes This comes from having libdb. Other missed items: checking for libintl... no Not sure why it isn't finding this. My rawhide build with this failed with: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/bin/otp /usr/bin/otpprint /usr/share/man/man1/otp.1.gz /usr/share/man/man1/otpprint.1.gz Which look to be a little too generic. Don't know why my local tests are failing but mock/koji builds are fine. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Ken Dreyer changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #55 from Ken Dreyer --- The libtommath bundling exception passed the FPC, so there are no more blockers to accepting this into Fedora. I've updated the package to the latest 1.6 git snapshot. Package in Git: https://gitorious.org/ktdreyer/heimdal-packaging Spec URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal.spec SRPM URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/heimdal-1.6.0-0.2.20140429gitd60ba47.fc21.src.rpm F21 scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6795654 The package is now ready for review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #54 from Ken Dreyer --- Hi Christopher, Alexander's latest pull request on GitHub (https://github.com/libtom/libtommath/pull/18) is out of date with what's now bundled in Heimdal's 1.6 branch. So that pull request will never be merged as-is. We will need to open new pull requests, which I've done at https://github.com/libtom/libtommath/pull/21 , https://github.com/libtom/libtommath/pull/22 , https://github.com/libtom/libtommath/pull/23 for starters. Please read the FPC ticket in its entirety. The problem is that upstream libtommath's mp_expt_d() function does not operate the way that Heimdal needs it to operate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cicku...@gmail.com --- Comment #53 from Christopher Meng --- Better waiting for the merge on github and build from snapshot? I'm maintaining dropbear in Fedora which also depends on libtom(I just unbundled libtom* libraries in Sep) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #52 from Ken Dreyer --- (In reply to Paul Robert Marino from comment #51) > Can we consolidate this effort on Github or some similar site for spec > files, patches, etc.. Sure. Our latest spec file and package is on Gitorious. https://gitorious.org/ktdreyer/heimdal-packaging Regarding the bundled libtommath, the libtommath library in Heimdal's master branch is much closer to upstream libtommath now, but it's still not 100% there. I've requested a bundling exception from the FPC: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/387 I would appreciate it if the interested parties could add themselves as CC's to that FPC trac ticket. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #37 from Ken Dreyer 2011-10-04 19:58:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #36) > I'm not sure I want to add .heimdal for everything. It's already too much > typing (tabbing) :-). Opinions? Yeah, I am not excited about it. I do think .heimdal is the way to go for the long term... If we try to munge $PATH with /etc/profile.d/heimdal.sh, we're re-inventing the functionality that alternatives provides, in a less flexible way. I'm hoping we can try to get a solution on bug 692606. I mocked the SRPM on F15 i686, looks good here. One note: /etc/profile.d/heimdal.sh adds /usr/lib/heimdal/sbin/, but there's no such directory. Just normal "bin" is appropriate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #36 from Rok Papez 2011-10-04 12:15:53 EDT --- Heimdal 1.5.1 is released, rpms are here: http://fire1.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/fedora15/x86_64/ SRPMS: http://fire1.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal-1.5.1-1.fc15.src.rpm Specs: http://fire1.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal.spec Please test! I'm not sure I want to add .heimdal for everything. It's already too much typing (tabbing) :-). Opinions? Will look into license and bundled libraries. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #35 from Ken Dreyer 2011-09-28 17:10:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #33) > I'm releasing new packages for Fedora 15 x86_64: > http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/fedora15/ > > SRPMS: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal-1.5.1.pre20110912git-2.src.rpm > Specs: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal.spec This is looking good. One suggestion on handling conflicting binaries: With 1.5.1.pre20110912git-2, half the apps are renamed, and half are in /usr/lib/heimdal/bin . I'd rather we just go with ".heimdal" for everything. It will be clearer if everything follows the same convention, and it will be easier to use the man pages when everything's in the same directory. What do you think? Another thing to nail down before a formal review is the license tag. The GPL popped up on Orion's fossology run, but running git grep on master shows there are no GPL sources, so I think we can safely say "BSD and MIT". Still need to look into the bundled libraries listed above, and what would be involved to unbundle. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #34 from Orion Poplawski 2011-09-28 11:37:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) > AFAIK systemd: > - has compatibility mode for legacy SysV init scripts But for F16 packages are supposed to migrate to native systemd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd > - needs changes in upstream source-code to handle inetd style connection > passing No idea > - is not mandatory Hard to say, but it is a goal for F16 and later. > - isn't available yet on CentOS 6 / RHEL True. You're going to need to support both :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #33 from Rok Papez 2011-09-28 04:31:25 EDT --- I'm releasing new packages for Fedora 15 x86_64: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/fedora15/ SRPMS: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal-1.5.1.pre20110912git-2.src.rpm Specs: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal.spec Quality status: It builds/installs on x86_64 :-) I'm going to test/fix/update in the next couple of days/weeks. Targets are: - Fedora 15 x86_64 - Fedora 15 i386 - CentOS 6 x86_64 Changelog: * Tue Sep 27 2011 Rok Papež, ARNES - 1.5.1.pre20110912git-2 - FESCo updates: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/577 - Implicit %Requires removed, rpmbuild can figure them out itself - Implicit %Provides removed, we are NOT compatible with krb5 - Enable hardened build: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kevin/DRAFT_When_to_use_PIE_compiler_flags - Merged updates from Orion Poplawski -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #32 from Rok Papez 2011-09-28 02:09:53 EDT --- AFAIK systemd: - has compatibility mode for legacy SysV init scripts - needs changes in upstream source-code to handle inetd style connection passing - is not mandatory - isn't available yet on CentOS 6 / RHEL What do others think about systemd? Do we need it, prefer it or don't like it? :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #31 from Orion Poplawski 2011-09-27 13:41:56 EDT --- Note also that a number of changes will need to be done for systemd in Fedora 15+. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #30 from Rok Papez 2011-09-27 13:32:06 EDT --- I'm currently building with a version from GIT (would be 1.5.1). Need to fix some more things with the merge from Orions changes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #29 from Ken Dreyer 2011-09-20 11:41:09 EDT --- Just a note that 1.5 is now released. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=702266 External Bug ID||Red Hat Knowledge Base ||55149 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001
--- Comment #28 from Orion Poplawski 2011-04-07 16:00:25
EDT ---
* Thu Apr 7 2011 Orion Poplawksi - 1.4.1rc2-3
- Use %%{_libdir}/heimdal and environment-modules for kerberized apps
- Add appl-{clients,servers} sub-packages
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/heimdal-1.4.1rc2-3.fc14.src.rpm
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/heimdal.spec
It builds, but I have done no testing.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #27 from Orion Poplawski 2011-03-31 13:18:48 EDT --- Submitted bug 692606 to ask for alternatives support in krb5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #26 from Ken Dreyer 2011-03-31 00:13:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) > - Heimdal installs a couple items in different locations than MIT does (e.g. > /usr/sbin/kadmin vs. /usr/bin/kadmin). Should these be aligned? Yeah, kadmin and ktutil can move from /usr/sbin to /usr/bin. These don't require local root access, and this matches krb5-workstation's layout. (In reply to comment #25) > * Wed Mar 30 2011 Orion Poplawksi - 1.4.1rc2-2 Thanks. We can also now drop Source4 and 5, heimdal.sh and heimdal.csh, from profile.d in heimdal-libs. I'm looking over http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Alternatives, and I guess if we ever want this to work fully we'll need nalin to agree to use alternatives in MIT as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #25 from Orion Poplawski 2011-03-30 11:25:01 EDT --- * Wed Mar 30 2011 Orion Poplawksi - 1.4.1rc2-2 - Move includes to /usr/include/heimdal - Use more macros in configure command http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/heimdal-1.4.1rc2-1.fc14.src.rpm http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/heimdal.spec Interesting that krb5-appl-clients uses /usr/kerberos still. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001
--- Comment #24 from Ken Dreyer 2011-03-30 01:25:53 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #23)
> I've put a (heavily) modified version of the package here:
Cool, thanks for putting this together. Rok, as the official submitter, are you
interested in merging these changes in? Here are my initial comments.
IMHO it is more straightforward to use what you've done with libdir and mirror
that in includedir. The conflicts guidelines on the wiki says "Header Name
Conflicts - Put the headers in a subdirectory of /usr/include". So, we should
use, eg. /usr/include/heimdal/gssapi/gssapi.h instead of
/usr/include/gssapi.heimdal/gssapi.h.
This gets even more complicated when there is stuff like
/usr/include/krb5.h.heimdal and /usr/include/gssapi.h.heimdal . IMHO, just put
these all in a subdirectory and be done with it. I.e.
--includedir=%{_includedir}/heimdal
There are some other things that were the result of redefining %{_prefix}
--with-openssl=/usr \
--with-openldap=/usr \
--with-readline-include=/usr/include/readline \
--with-readline-lib=%{_libdir} \
--with-sqlite3=/usr \
These can go back to using macros. Eg --with-openssl = %{_prefix} , or
--with-readline-include = %{_includedir}/readline
> - Decide what to do about the other utilities (e.g.: ftp, login, pagsh, rcp,
> rsh, su, telnet) that conflict with other packages.
MIT puts these utilities in krb5-appl-clients. We could break Heimdal's
versions into a similar sub-package.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #23 from Orion Poplawski 2011-03-29 18:31:31 EDT --- I've put a (heavily) modified version of the package here: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/heimdal-1.4.1rc2-1.fc14.src.rpm http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/heimdal.spec This starts some of the work needed towards using alternatives in that it renames conflicting files. This is able to be installed in parallel to the MIT krb5-* packages. Many more things need to be done, including: - Set up alternatives. - Set up alternatives for the MIT krb5 package. - Decide what to do about the other utilities (e.g.: ftp, login, pagsh, rcp, rsh, su, telnet) that conflict with other packages. - Heimdal installs a couple items in different locations than MIT does (e.g. /usr/sbin/kadmin vs. /usr/bin/kadmin). Should these be aligned? - test, test, test. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #22 from Ken Dreyer 2011-03-28 19:04:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) > Created attachment 488277 [details] > conflicts between MIT and heimdal > > An attempt at a list of conflicts between MIT and Heimdal. Thanks, that is a useful list. Looks like it is more complicated than simply renaming the binaries. I've filed https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/577 so that we can at least know whether /usr/heimdal is viable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #21 from Rok Papez 2011-03-28 18:12:33 EDT --- In my opinion the /usr/heimdal is the most compatible option. Alternatives are used when packages are similar. I dare to say that Heimdal and MIT Kerberos are too different. If nothing else the API in libraries is not binary compatible and applications linked with MIT Kerberos won't be happy with Heimdal libraries. Same goes for using Conflicts. Some applications will need to have MIT Kerberos libraries installed. Of course I'm very interested in getting Heimdal into Fedora and will use whatever option is prefered by Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #20 from Orion Poplawski 2011-03-28 17:21:05 EDT --- Created attachment 488277 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=488277 conflicts between MIT and heimdal An attempt at a list of conflicts between MIT and Heimdal. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #19 from Andy Cobaugh 2011-03-28 13:19:32 EDT --- Fair enough. You use alternatives to switch to heimdal, then you take responsibility for things breaking. I like it. So for binaries that conflict, rename them to foo.heimdal. I guess we would also need the krb5-* package folks to do the same? What about man pages? As far as libraries go, only conflict I see right now is libgssapi. libgssapi currently provides that, and that's the citi nfsv4 version. I'm really wondering if we should just use Conflicts instead. Would avoid the need to use alternatives and the hassle of dealing with man pages and such. If someone installs heimdal, we could assume the user knows what they're doing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #18 from Ken Dreyer 2011-03-28 13:01:55 EDT --- Yeah, the commands are certainly different. I'm pretty sure most of the scripts that are distributed with Fedora will specify the full paths. For example, http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=krb5.git;f=kadmind.init;hb=refs/heads/master specifies "/usr/sbin/kadmind". I prefer not to break user-written scripts, but on the other hand, if a user runs "alternatives", imho it is their responsibility to verify that this will not break their own user-written code. (In reply to comment #16) > Shared libraries may be a trickier issue. If I understand the above discussion correctly, the two packages (MIT and Heimdal) can be installed side-by-side "out of the box", and it is only the names of the binaries themselves that conflict. Right? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #17 from Andy Cobaugh 2011-03-28 12:19:05 EDT --- Some of the commands are similar, some aren't. Some are drastically different. kadmin is different, kinit is different, klist is most certainly different. If there are any scripts that use the MIT commands that expect a certain command line syntax, they will most certainly break with Heimdal. Unless the user of alternatives doesn't require that the syntax be identical, then I would be in favor of #2. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #16 from Orion Poplawski 2011-03-28 12:08:44 EDT --- I think this is exactly why "alternatives" was developed, so #2 is the appropriate solution. This assumes that the commands for heimdal and MIT kerberos take essentially the same command line arguments. Is that correct? Shared libraries may be a trickier issue. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #15 from Ken Dreyer 2011-03-26 15:15:16 EDT --- I would love to get Heimdal into Fedora. Looking at the discussion above, in order to reconcile with MIT, we have the following options: 1. Install to /usr/heimdal. This will require an exception from FESCo. 2. Rename the Heimdal files to not conflict with MIT. Eg. "/usr/bin/kinit.heimdal", "kadmin.heimdal", etc. Use alternatives to switch between the two Kerberos implementations. This allows for side-by-side installations with MIT. 3. Use Conflicts: with the appropriate MIT packages. You have to choose to install one or the other. I imagine that #1 does not have a good chance of passing FESCo. Does #3 break useful things like pam_krb5? #2 seems like the path of least resistance to me... more experienced packagers, please weigh in your opinions. Relevant links FYI: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts - Conflicts Guidelines http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=482528 - Similar bug in Debian -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #14 from Orion Poplawski 2011-01-31 12:55:24 EST --- Looks like imath has been dropped in git master. readline can be used instead of editline. The gssapi lib is a heimdal library. That leaves libtommath. I've pointed heimdal to the new libtommath upstream so hopefully we can get them integrated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #13 from Orion Poplawski 2011-01-21 17:36:43 EST --- To actually use the system sqlite library, it appears you need to pass this to configure: --with-sqlite=/usr. I would be more happy with a patch that allowed you to remove lib/sqlite in %prep as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #12 from Orion Poplawski 2011-01-21 16:09:42 EST --- Created attachment 474690 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=474690 License analysis I've attached the output of a fossology license analysis. Most things are BSD or BSD-like, but there are a few things to check out. Most of the GPL items are actually bison generated files. 1127 Show BSD-style 98 Show BSD 79 Show FSF 26 Show Public-domain-claim 21 Show GPL_v2+ 10 Show GPL-exception 8 Show Cisco-style 6 Show IETF 6 Show MIT-style 3 Show MIT 3 Show NetBSD 2 Show GPL 2 Show See-doc(OTHER) 2 Show X11 1 Show BSD-possibility 1 Show Microsoft-possibility 1 Show MIT-possibility 1 Show OSF-style 1 Show Public-domain-ref 1 Show RSA-Security 1 Show Trademark-ref 1 Show UnclassifiedLicense -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #11 from Orion Poplawski 2011-01-21 16:07:19 EST --- /usr/heimdal is just not going to be acceptable in Fedora as isn't doesn't follow the FHS. You maybe could try to ask for an exception from FESCO. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #10 from Andy Cobaugh 2011-01-21 15:57:09 EST --- I would also prefer that they stay separate. Using alternatives to switch out things like kinit, kadmin, etc would probably have unintended consequences. The command line options to those tools is very different, for example. Unless Fedora decides to replace MIT with Heimdal entirely, I think keeping heimdal separate under /usr/heimdal would be preferable. Regarding bundled libraries, it might be a good idea to bring this up on the heimdal list and see what folks there have to say. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #9 from Rok Papez 2011-01-21 14:41:48 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) > Looks like there are a couple bundled libraries in heimdal - libtommath - > modified (packaged in Fedora), imath (not packaged), and apparently modified > versions of editline and libgssapi. > > License audit is going to be fun. I've not reviewd the licenses (yet) :). > Also, I think we're going to need to use alternatives in Fedora to handle > conflicts with MIT-Kerberos. EL6 may be a pickle, since RedHat is unlikely to > make the necessary changes to their package. Hmm... I'd prefer to have the same spec for both Fedora and RHEL/CentOS but if needed I'll split them. In current version Heimdal and MIT coexist, MIT binaries are first in the search path meaning they have precedence. I'm OK with this solution. Alternatives might be nice but I doubt Fedora will want to invest any time in this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #8 from Orion Poplawski 2011-01-21 13:36:39 EST --- Looks like there are a couple bundled libraries in heimdal - libtommath - modified (packaged in Fedora), imath (not packaged), and apparently modified versions of editline and libgssapi. Also, I think we're going to need to use alternatives in Fedora to handle conflicts with MIT-Kerberos. EL6 may be a pickle, since RedHat is unlikely to make the necessary changes to their package. License audit is going to be fun. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #7 from Rok Papez 2011-01-21 03:03:28 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > What's the status here? I'm getting connection timeouts trying to resolve > www.pingo.org. pingo.org domain is currently unavailable (ISP changed the IP address of primary DNS for pingo.org with no warning). This will be resolved in the next couple of days. You can access the server by IP: http://194.249.18.75/aai/heimdal/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||or...@cora.nwra.com --- Comment #6 from Orion Poplawski 2011-01-20 17:35:28 EST --- What's the status here? I'm getting connection timeouts trying to resolve www.pingo.org. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #5 from Rok Papez 2010-12-01 05:07:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > I note that Rok never responded to Andy's comment. A few folks have wanted to > get Heimdal into Fedora and this is the second review ticket that's been > filed, but for some reason things seem to stall out. Actually I wrote privately to Andy, I'm attaching a snippet: Regarding the libexec vs. sbin... I think libexec is for executables that are not supposed to be run by a (super)user directly but by other programmes. I'll check with the newest FHS since it's been some time since I've studied it. Other comments I agree with or need to study them closer :)). Fedora does some things differently and I plan to suport bith CentOS latest and Fedora with the same .src.rpm. Looking forward to your specs file as I plan to make use of it ;). > What's happening with this one? I'm just a packager here ;-). Not sure why Fedora ignored this package submission. On the Heimdal front I'm more or less waiting for Heimdal 1.4.1 final and Centos 6. Since it's been quite a long time since 1.4.1rc1 was released and interest seems to have picked up, I've prepared the new release: SRPMS: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/heimdal-1.4.1rc1-1.arnes.src.rpm Fedora14 i386 and x86_64 build: http://www.pingo.org/aai/heimdal/fedora14/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Bartlett 2010-11-30 04:47:37 EST --- I'm keen for Heimdal to make it in to Fedora to make it more practical to have Samba4 in Fedora. This is because Samba4's Active Directory Domain Control functionality is unlikely to support another Kerberos distribution, but it is preferred not to use bundled libraries in Fedora. Currently Samba4 bundles Heimdal because we have custom patches to it, but in Ubuntu our Samba Team member Jelmer Vernooij also co-maintains Heimdal and has arranged that the versions be in sync, so that we can use system versions for at least some parts (with an aim to extend this so we don't bundle at all eventually). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-29 19:25:38 EST --- I note that Rok never responded to Andy's comment. A few folks have wanted to get Heimdal into Fedora and this is the second review ticket that's been filed, but for some reason things seem to stall out. What's happening with this one? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added CC||abart...@samba.org --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-29 16:57:33 EST --- *** Bug 452212 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001
--- Comment #1 from Andy Cobaugh 2010-09-16 16:27:49 EDT
---
I've been meaning to comment on this bug for a while now. Just getting back to
it.
I recently took the specfile that you came up with and modified it a bit to
hopefully bring it more inline with Fedora packaging guidelines, but more
importantly to turn it into something I was happy with distributing to our
machines here. On that note, I'm sure there are more things that can be done to
bring it up to par before inclusion in Fedora.
First, the SRPM used to build the packages we're currently distributing to our
clients:
ftp://ftp.bx.psu.edu/software/yum/centos/5/source/heimdal-1.3.3-3.bx.src.rpm
Offhand, a couple of things:
1) Heimdal is up to 1.4.1rc1, with a 1.4.1 release very soon according to Love.
2) Use %configure instead of ./configure
3) Change the way BuildRoot is defined, something like %(mktemp -ud
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
4) I'm not sure the Provides statements in the sub-packages are standard, or
even do anything? Someone else may comment on those.
5) I disabled make check entirely, as it was failing for me on Centos 5.5, and
I haven't had a chance to figure out why.
6) I redefine things like _bindir and _sbindir, among others, so that if we
should ever someday make heimdal the default, or if someone wants something
other than /usr/heimdal, changing that is as simple as changing %define hprefix
%{_prefix}/heimdal at the top. Handling the coexistance of Heimdal with MIT krb
is tricky either way, and I'm not sure if there's a pre-defined method of
dealing with this in Fedora. I don't think using _prefix in %files is the right
way to handle that (or rather, redefining _prefix).
7) I moved libexec to sbin. That's just a personal preference though.
8) The scriptlets (preun, postun, etc) should check $1 and modify their
behavior accordingly.
Side note: Maybe we could talk to the MIT folks at some point and see if they
might be interested in using alternatives to handle the userland stuff like
kinit, klist, etc?
I'd be happy to discuss this further. I will probably be dropping my 1.4.1
specfile somewhere as soon as it's released.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613001 Rok Papez changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
