lorikeet-heimdal

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 12:00 +0300, Matthieu Patou wrote:
> Hello,
> While working on the build farm I found that quite a lot of hosts didn't 
> build it is there any reason for this ? Do we still need it ?
> 
> I'm asking this kind of stupid question because on most of the specific 
> build file it's with variable and compiler the only difference between 
> generic.fns and <host>.fns
> 
> Being able to either add it to all the hosts or remove it from generic 
> would allow us to use a more generic configuration for build.

Currently there isn't a single lorikeet-heimdal tree, but instead I push
to my repository, because I've never asked for access to the 'common'
repository.

Also, current heimdal didn't compile with --enable-socket-wrapper when I
last tried, which we must use for build farm hosts.

I would like to solve this at some point, and then perhaps build
upstream heimdal on our build farm, to ensure it remains portable.  (we
don't differ enough to be worth testing lorikeet-heimdal itself).

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20101121/14e0ac55/attachment.pgp>