Heimdal vs MIT KerberosV

[Tim Judd]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Mel <fbsd.questions at rachie.is-a-geek.net>wrote:

> On Thursday 26 February 2009 08:48:35 Tim Judd wrote:
> > It'd be just as easy for me to build
> > MIT krb5 from ports and let it install into /usr/local.  That's fine --
> but
> > I wanted to stretch my knowledge on FreeBSD and the building process and
> > would like to know what it would take to drop in MIT in exchange for
> > Heimdal.  I'd guess a couple possible ways to do it, but I wanted to ask
> > the experts before I broke FreeBSD.  :)
> >
> > Options as I see them:
> >    1) Take the port directory and replace the contents of
> > /usr/src/kerberos5 with security/krb5 from ports
> >    2) Take the tarball from MIT and drop it into /usr/src/kerberos5
> >
> >
> > If anything were to work, I'd expect #1 to.  So what is the expert's
> > opinion, is it really this easy?
>
> Neither will work. The ports build system is a vastly different superset of
> the src system. Ports core makefiles are in /usr/ports/Mk, and src
> in /usr/share/mk. Ports take very little from /usr/share/mk, only sys.mkfor
> default flags, bsd.own.mk for default ownerships, the bsd.ports*.mk to
> point
> to $PORTSDIR and exclude /etc/src.conf and that's about it.
>
> Further more, the base system doesn't use 'configure', patches are applied
> to
> make it work for FreeBSD without this hurdle. In short, if you want to
> learn
> about the src make system, this isn't a good project. A better project is
> read the pmake tutorial, the make(1) manpage, comments in
> /usr/share/mk/*.mk
> and start writing your own software with this build system.
> Start with something like:
> ========
> cat <<EOF > BSDmakefile
> PROG=hello
>
> .include <bsd.prog.mk>
> EOF
> cat <<'EOF' > hello.c
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
>        printf("Hello world!\n");
>        return 0;
> }
> EOF
> make
> =========
>
> Building WITHOUT_KERBEROS and installing MIT-port, is best option to use
> that
> implementation. You may need to remove libraries by hand, not sure if make
> delete-old-libs covers it.
> --
> Mel
>
> Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules
>    and never get to the software part.
>


Mel,

Thank you very much for the informative reply.  It not only gives me a
starting point, but it also describes why it won't work in good detail.  I
always look forward to your posts -- for they're very well done.

I will personally archive this off, because it's information is like gold to
me, especially when I'm so new to altering OS functions...  Thanks again.