Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> From: Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Marcus Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: openafs-info <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] com_err hell (WAS: asetkey: failed to set key, code
> 70354694)
> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:25:08 -0400 (EDT)
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Marcus Watts wrote:
>
> > Carson Gaspar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> From: Carson Gaspar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: openafs-info <[email protected]>
> >> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Subject: [OpenAFS] com_err hell (WAS: asetkey: failed to set key, code
> >> 70354694)
> >> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:13:58 -0700
> >>
> >> Re: the whole com_err mess...
> >>
> >> If AFS has an incompatible implementation, why not just rename the
> >> exported functions / vars and get it over with? This should be no more
> >> than a day's work, and would solve the problem very nicely. Or am I
> >> missing something?
> >
> > From an application standpoint that would be a very
> > disappointing answer - it means you can't really have
> > one error number space anymore.
>
> Well, for the moment you can't anyway, really. We need to find a way to
> unify with Heimdal, ext2 and MIT Krb5 but until we do we can at least make
> it possible to not lose.
The implementation of com_err that's in the rxk5 patch actually can
do this. The last asetkey session I posted had errors from both mit
kerberos & afs going through one com_err.
Granted, it's not as pretty as it should be, and it would be good
for all those groups you named to come to a better consensus as to
how this should all work.
-Marcus Watts
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
