[2056] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: comments on HP and BSDI problems
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marc Horowitz)
Mon Dec 2 15:08:38 1996
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Ezra Peisach <epeisach@MIT.EDU>, Sam Hartman <hartmans@MIT.EDU>,
krbdev@MIT.EDU
From: Marc Horowitz <marc@cygnus.com>
Date: 02 Dec 1996 15:08:11 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o"'s message of Mon, 2 Dec 1996 13:46:29 -0500
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU> writes:
>> Here's a proposal. Tomorrow, we will make a single code thaw and
>> refreeze, wherein we'll only put extremely low risk, small-impact
>> changes for portability reasons. Things like #ifdef hpux are much safer
>> than adding a configure test, unless we're willing to retest on all
>> architectures, including those that we don't have direct access to.
>> This will give us three days to rebuild binary distributions for a
>> Friday 12/6 release.
>>
>> As long as we are putting in architecture dependent, low risk fixes, IMO
>> this should be acceptable. What do other people think?
I don't like the idea of putting platform ifdef's in our code, for any
reason. I'd rather note in the hpux build notes that the patch was
applied, and include the patch.
Marc
