[1321] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: sub-packages of krb5 for autoconf purposes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ken Raeburn)
Sat Jun 15 00:50:50 1996
To: Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
Cc: krbdev@MIT.EDU
From: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@cygnus.com>
Date: 14 Jun 1996 21:50:37 -0700
In-Reply-To: Tom Yu's message of Thu, 13 Jun 1996 21:20:49 -0400
I think anything that could reasonably be considered separable in
functionality from the rest of the Kerberos tree -- certainly some
applications like telnet and gssftp, some util directories -- should
be configured separately so that they *can* be separated. Anything
imported like autoconf definitely should be modified as little as
possible. (I would argue for the et and ss directories being separate
also, so the various divergent versions might be re-merged someday.)
And absolutely it must be possible to maintain local additions to the
tree that are configured separately, without great difficulty.
Your scheme sounds good, though I think it should be broken down just
a little further, and it would probably work best in combination with
a reorganization of the source hierarchy.
