[573] in Zephyr_Bugs
Re: ongoing zephyr work
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghudson@MIT.EDU)
Sat Jan 28 14:41:52 1995
From: ghudson@MIT.EDU
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 14:42:03 -0500
To: David Simmons <simmons@EE.MsState.Edu>
Cc: zephyr-bugs@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: "[572] in Zephyr_Bugs"
> Is any current work being done on the Zephyr project?
Yes, I did a lot of work on it as a student employee during the past
summer and fall, and there's a staff member currently doing work on
it. Most of my work had to do with optimizing the server and closing
security holes.
> Zephyr has great potential, however it's not really able to be
> compiled at any non-MIT site without major surgery on the source
> tree.
I think you may be overestimating the effort required to build Zephyr
at a non-MIT site, since I know a number of people who've done so with
minimal problems, but I will admit that the code isn't highly
portable, and there have been problems building the code without
hesiod and kerberos. We have, however, been using the current code
(as reflected by the most recent snapshot on net-dist) under both
Linux and SunOS, without rewriting the Makefiles, for a while now.
Make sure you're using the correct build procedure:
imake -Iconfig -DTOPDIR=`pwd` -DCURDIR=.
make Makefiles
make all
If that procedures egregiously wrong Makefiles, try building imake in
the utils subdirectory and using that; that's not necessary for either
Linux or SunOS, though.
> If a group wanted to put forth the effort needed to "autoconf" the
> Zephyr code and clean up the source tree, would the modified package
> be redistributable under whatever copyright Zephyr has?
Yes, Zephyr is under an MIT copyright, and using autoconf does not
require you to put your work under the GPL. However, there are
already a couple of people working on putting the source tree under
Gnu autoconf, so I'd wait a few months and check back on this.
