dosman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, I built kerberos with IBM C and used gcc for the pam_krb5 > module. I'm unclear on how the pam-krb5 package picks up my compile > options for kerberos though. I tried to build pam-krb5 with the IBM C > but between that failing and the dire warning in the notes that pam-krb5 > would only build on gcc I opted to struggle through the build using > gcc. I suppose my other option would be to build kerberos using gcc, but > getting it to build on AIX period was painfull enough to warant leaving > a sleeping dog lying.
Right now, pam-krb5 doesn't support xlc just because I don't have an AIX system and I don't know the right flags to pass to xlc to build a dynamic PAM module. If you know the correct flags for AIX (or if anyone else here does), I can easily add that case to the configure logic. > My goal was to relieve myself of maintaining 2+ versions of kerberos on > my AIX boxes, it would be benefitial to have staticly linked libraries > in my case. It's interesting that when building pam-krb5 with this older > kerberos on my systems (purpose for being there unknown, installed > before my time) that ldd shows pam_krb5.so has no kerberos dependancies > and the binary is about 700Kb larger. When building with kerberos 1.6 we > now have dependancies and a 700Kb reduction in size. MIT Kerberos 1.6 doesn't support static builds. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> ________________________________________________ Kerberos mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
