[kerberos-discuss] thoughts/issues making MIT krb code fit for drop-in to Solaris

[Henry B. Hotz]

API and source distribution compatibility does not necessarily imply  
ABI compatibility.  I don't see a strong need for ABI compatibility.

On Sep 18, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Will Fiveash wrote:

> (please reply so that boath krbdev at mit.edu and
> kerberos-discuss at opensolaris.org are included)
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 07:14:56PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 17:01 -0500, Will Fiveash wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 05:48:41PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 19:04 -0500, Will Fiveash wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts as to whether this goal is achievable and on an  
>>>>> approach if
>>>>> so?
>>>>
>>>> Would this plan affect other platforms too?
>>>> If so, how?
>>>
>>> If there is any impact to binaries it would something that the
>>> Consortium would agree is beneficial to all supported platforms.   
>>> For
>>> example, if the Consortium agrees that providing I18N support can be
>>> done reasonably for all platforms then this change would become
>>> universal to the code otherwise the change would be restricted to
>>> Solaris platforms.
>>
>> Ok, but it seem that some of the feature may break compatibility.
>> Is there analysis on what may break ?
>
> What do you mean by "compatibility"?
>
> --
> Will Fiveash
> Sun Microsystems Inc.
> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/kerberos/
> _______________________________________________
> kerberos-discuss mailing list
> kerberos-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/kerberos-discuss