MEMORY keytabs - how should they be destroyed?

[Jeffrey Altman]

Sam Hartman wrote:
> Assuming that you want memory keytabs to be resolved using the normal
> mechanism, the approach you describe seems fine.  Another approach is
> to have a krb5_kt_new_memory function that returns a handle to a new
> memory keytab which is destroyed on close.
>
> The Heimdal semantic doesn't seem all that bad to me.
>
> --Sam
Love believes that krb5_kt_destroy should be added.  Would you agree to
that change?
If so, I will try to add it tomorrow.

Jeffrey Altman
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3355 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/krbdev/attachments/20070123/1bc6ca59/attachment.bin