|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 07:56:29 -0700 From: Ray Van Dolson <rvandolson@esri.com> To: Tareq Alrashid <tareq@qerat.com> Message-ID: <20160513145629.GA15827@esri.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <64F47B0A-6B01-43EF-89D0-3AA99DECDF15@qerat.com> Cc: kerberos@mit.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Errors-To: kerberos-bounces@mit.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:47:09AM -0400, 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. > > 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. > > I have my own opinion, but I also wonder what others had in mind > > Thank you, > Tareq I'd use vendor provided packages whenever possible, unless you have some very specific need to roll from source. Scales better and frees your time to do other, valuable things. :) Ray ________________________________________________ Kerberos mailing list Kerberos@mit.edu https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |