On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 11:41:41 +0100, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
problem in having them both on ftp? Client libraries should be
compatible (i.e. heimdal client works with MIT server, that's the point
of having a 'protocol'). Incompatible parts are kadmin and probably
the rest of server stuff -
On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 11:36:42 +0100, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
But that's not the point, you missed the most important issue (system
MIT makes samba4 useless):
APIs and ABIs in Heimdal and MIT are different. Samba uses Heimdal to do
AD DC kerberos. It does not build with MIT. Fedora
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 01:57:59 +0100, Tomasz Pala wrote:
My point is - assuming I haven't forgot about anything (considering my last
mail
about versioned symbols) we could safely:
1. compile samba against heimdal to have AD (as an exception!),
2. compile everything else against MIT,
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015, Tomasz Pala wrote:
Whatever, let's assume some require heimdal, some MIT. What's the
problem in having them both on ftp? Client libraries should be
compatible (i.e. heimdal client works with MIT server, that's the point
of having a 'protocol'). Incompatible parts are
On Sat, 07 Feb 2015, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz wrote:
On Saturday 07 of February 2015, Tomasz Pala wrote:
Anyone knows/remembers why did we choose heimdal over MIT?
IPv6 support I guess.
That was old reason, last time I checked MIT did not have LDAP
and Samba support. Also no Samba flavor ever
Whatever, let's assume some require heimdal, some MIT. What's the
problem in having them both on ftp? Client libraries should be
compatible (i.e. heimdal client works with MIT server, that's the point
of having a 'protocol'). Incompatible parts are kadmin and probably
the rest of server stuff -
