[1121] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: OV admin system integration plan
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ken Raeburn)
Mon May 6 15:57:51 1996
To: "Barry Jaspan" <bjaspan@MIT.EDU>
Cc: krbdev@MIT.EDU
From: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@cygnus.com>
Date: 06 May 1996 14:56:49 -0400
In-Reply-To: "Barry Jaspan"'s message of Mon, 6 May 96 11:35:31 -0400
Some Cygnus customers are now using pre-beta-6 in production. They're
big sites and will probably have a lot of slaves in use by the time we
get them the new code.
Secondly, updating a beta 5/6 site will be possible anyway.
I'm talking about an incremental update, with the ability to back out
a bad version at any time, not an all-at-once one-way conversion.
Writing a beta-6 format dump file shouldn't be hard. In fact, Marc
says it's likely that the extra fields in the beta-7 format could just
be ignored (well, stored away never to be read again) by the beta-6
code.
I don't really have strong emotions one way or the other. I do know
that DB had bugs in the past, but Marc now assures me that they are
all fixed. Ted says that the internal DB disk format will likely
change the future, but I suppose sites can handle that with a
dump/reload cycle, so it isn't that critical. Using just one db
library would *simplify the configure system* (always a worthy goal)
and we could even dike out the #ifdefs for dbm support in kdb_dbm.c.
So maybe that is the right choice.
I'd like to see the same db system used for both, but I'm not
convinced we should eliminate the options to change which that system
is.
