On Fri, Jun 01, 2007, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 22:39 +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2007, David M. Fetter wrote:
> >
> > > As I was building the latest samba rpm for the security issue, I noticed
> > > that there were a couple of incorrect dependencies...
> > >
> > > The first is that it required "openpkg >= 20060823", which is not true.
> > > It doesn't seem to have any specific relation to which version of
> > > openpkg that is being used.
> > > [...]
> >
> > IMHO the dependency is logically correct as rc.samba contains
> > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]@/bin/openpkg rc" which uses the "openpkg" frontend
> > (instead
> > of calling "rc" directly) and this went into SetUID mode on 20060823
> > accrording to the HISTORY file of the "openpkg" package. So, you're
> > right: technically still still might work, but at least logically
> > packages using "openpkg rc" really do this because of the SetUID
> > functionality is now in effect.
>
> Ah, well then that makes sense. It isn't clear why it had this
> dependency when it did work under older version of openpkg.
>
> >
> > > [...]
> > > The second is that this new samba does require the latest kerberos-1.6
> > > version, but this isn't listed as a requirement at all. It took me a
> > > little bit to determine that I should rebuild the latest kerberos from
> > > current prior to rebuilding the latest samba, which then in turn made
> > > samba build successfully. Including requirements such as this would be
> > > highly useful because it would eliminate time spent to troubleshoot why
> > > it isn't building when it's simply a BuildPreReq.
> >
> > Do you mean "samba" required "kerberos" if you have _NOT_ used
> > "kerberos::with_ads=yes"? If this is the case, then not the dependency
> > is missing but Samba accidental uses Kerberos now. Then we have not
> > to add the depdendency. Then we have to fix Samba. If it is just
> > under "with_ads=yes" everything is fine.
>
> Well, kerberos doesn't seem to have an option of
> "kerberos::with_ads=yes". It has the following option for the old 1.4
> rpm:
Err. sorry, I means samba::with_adns, of course.
>
> kerberos::with_fsl = yes
>
> and these options in the new 1.6 rpm:
>
> kerberos::with_fsl = yes
> kerberos::with_server = yes
>
> The options I built with samba are:
>
> samba::with_pam = yes
> samba::with_swat = yes
> samba::with_acl = yes
> samba::with_ldap = yes
> samba::with_ads = yes
>
> Without building the latest 1.6 version of kerberos, samba would not
> build. After building kerberos-1.6 and installing it, samba built,
> installed and worked fine.
Ah, ok. So you really have with_ads=yes. Ok, this explains why Kerberos
is required. But your point is that really Kerberos __1.6__ is required,
right? And older 1.5 version doesn't work, right? So we have to make the
dependency stronger?
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
OpenPKG http://openpkg.org
User Communication List openpkg-users@openpkg.org
