Building your own vs. deploying OS packaged version of MIT Kerberos?
Sean Elble
elbles at sessys.com
Fri May 13 11:12:01 EDT 2016
On 13.05.2016 10:47, Tareq Alrashid wrote:
> The new world order seem to demand some adjustments to how we do
> things nowadays with on premise and cloud service deployment. We know
> how many OS’es come with prebuilt versions Kerberos RHEL/OS
> X…etc., and I am starting to ponder if efficiency could be
> optimized if we no longer built our own Kerberos binaries from
> downloaded MIT source, but rather just configure OS’s e.g. RHEL 7
> version of krb5-1.13? RedHat does release security patches with OS
> patches and that can save us some manual labor.
As someone who *always* used to build my own versions of packages, my
philosophy for the last ten years or so has been to use the
distribution-provided packages unless you have a *really* good reason to
build them yourself. Red Hat, Debian, etc. can dedicate a lot more time
to tracking, patching, and testing bugs and security holes than most
people (certainly myself) can.
>
> Is this an obvious non-issue as which version we choose to deploy or
> is the known philosophy, I have been following since 1999; download
> from MIT and build on my own.
For me, the only reason I'd go with building my own would be to
standardize on a given version across platforms. That, or if you needed
special compile time options that a distribution doesn't compile with,
but that's exceedingly rare, I think.
>
> I have my own opinion, but I also wonder what others had in mind
>
> Thank you,
> Tareq
> ________________________________________________
> Kerberos mailing list Kerberos at mit.edu
> https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
More information about the Kerberos
mailing list