[833] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: rearranging krb5 include files: please retain some sanity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Kohl)
Mon Jan 23 12:18:38 1995
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 12:18:20 -0500
From: John Kohl <jtk@atria.com>
To: tytso@MIT.EDU
Cc: krbdev@MIT.EDU, proven@MIT.EDU, eichin@cygnus.com
In-Reply-To: <9501231516.AA06504@dcl.MIT.EDU> (message from Theodore Ts'o on Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:16:11 +0500)
>>>>> "Ted" == o <Theodore> writes:
Ted> The basic idea which we're looking at is that what you export out to an
Ted> application writer will be a *single* krb5.h file. Hence, it can live
Ted> up in the top-level. ....
Ted> I expect that if a vendor ships Kerberos V5 bundled, it will install
Ted> krb5.h in /usr/include, or perhaps in /usr/local/include.
Ted> Does this still give you heartburn? If so, why?
Well, that's much less objectionable than my previous impression of what
was in the works. The only question that remains is whether at this
juncture it makes sense to be changing the include file name. Is there
some compelling reason to change the API by changing the name from
<krb5/krb5.h> to <krb5.h> ?
[As I said previously, I really don't care if the build-internal include
file layout moves around; I'm mostly concerned about diddling the API
unnecessarily.]
==John
