[PROPOSAL] Require builtin or system krb5 libs

[simo]

On Sat, 2011-12-31 at 20:58 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote: 
> Back in October, I wrote the the list suggesting that we should adopt an
> explicit policy that we require at least some level of Kerberos support
> to build Samba:
> 
> On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 21:03 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> 
> > I would actually like us to consider if there are systems that we care
> > about without krb5-devel, and which cannot use the waf build.  If we
> > could always expect at least some kind of Kerberos library (internal or
> > system heimdal from the waf build, or any system from autoconf), we
> > could make our code much simpler in parts.
> 
> I would like to make that a firm proposal.  For me at least, Samba both
> 3.5.11 and current master do not compile without krb5-devel.  As such,
> it seems no testing is done on systems without a kerberos library, and
> our users have not been inconvenienced by this requirement. 
> 
> Therefore, as we have a way to build Samba without a system kerberos
> (the waf build), I would like us to require that users either build with
> waf, or build with a system krb5-devel.
> 
> Doing so would remove a lot of dead, untested #ifndef HAVE_KRB5 stub
> functions, and make our code easier to follow and simpler to develop. 
> 
> What do others think?

I am ok in always requireing kerberos libraries, but given we are making
a requirement I would go further and specify a minimum MIT Kerberos or
Heimdal Kerberos versions.

Testing for specific functionality to be present instead of version
numbers is also ok.

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>