Project review: Interposer mechanisms

Henry B. Hotz hotz at
Thu Oct 4 19:25:42 EDT 2012

On Oct 4, 2012, at 9:32 AM, <krbdev-request at> <krbdev-request at> wrote:

> Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 09:45:58 -0400
> From: Simo Sorce <simo at>
> Subject: Re: Project review: Interposer mechanisms
> To: Luke Howard <lukeh at>
> Cc: krbdev at
> Message-ID: <1349358358.22373.143.camel at>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 08:42 +1000, Luke Howard wrote:
>> Is there a reason why the interposer has to explicitly enumerate the
>> mechanisms it wishes to interpose? What if it wishes to interpose all
>> mechanisms?
> Good question.
> But in what case would you want to interpose a mechanism you know
> nothing about ?

In the case where you want to replace a standard deployment with a development version or an upgraded version of *everything*.

> Not saying you shouldn't just trying to understand your PoV.
> We could allow the interposer to return a wildcard OID I guess and then
> special case it in the mechglue initialization code, it wouldn't be
> hard.
> Simo.
> -- 
> Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz at, or hbhotz at

More information about the krbdev mailing list