lprng uses private Kerberos Functions?

[Miro Jurisic]

>  > >Ummm... have you heard of 'legacy software support?'
>>
>>  Yes, we have. This is one of the cases in which we consciously
>>  decided to break it. This API has been wrong to use for years, and
>>  that didn't have any influence on whether people use it or not. Now
>>  that we removed it, finally people are fixing their code. Since they
>>  have to recompile for Mac OS X _anyway_, it was a reasonable point to
>>  force them to fix their code in our opinion.
>
>OK, this is reasonable.  Of course, you realize that this will
>break compatibility with the OLDER versions of LPRng that use
>these functions.

It will? How so? We haven't removed the API from regular UNIX 
distributions (yet), so that code will continue to work fine. We've 
never exported this API from our Mac OS X distributions, so Mac OS X 
code has always had to provide its own versions of those functions in 
order to link against our libraries.

I don't see how this will break anything. All it will do is force 
people to fix their code when they port it to Mac OS X. Since this 
fix will also fix their code on other platforms, after a while, the 
code will be correct on all platforms. Then we can yank the functions 
completely; in the meanwhile, we can deprecate them in the 
documentation, and we can deprecate them in the headers.

>Send me a sample set of program with makefiles, etc. that
>(Note the critical stuff):

As a team, we should and will do this. As an individual, this is not 
where my expertise is, so rather than writing more incorrect sample 
code, I am going to leave this to someone else.

meeroh
-- 

<http://web.meeroh.org/> | MIT I/S Mac developer | KB1FMP

"Well, I must endure the presence of two or three caterpillars if I 
wish to become acquainted with the butterflies." -- Antoine de 
Saint-Exupery, "The Little Prince"