--- Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW, I'm assuming that you wouldn't complain about the removal of
> crypt(). I can see your complaint about other things, but nothing
> that answered my specific question.
I assume it is this bit in des_old.h which you are referring
In message <00d501c264ae$1bf4f280$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:10:47
-0700, "Sam Leffler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
sam> 0.9.7 caused massive havoc compiling kerberos 4 (and to some extent 5) when
sam> I integrated beta 3 into the freebsd tree. The crypt() macro was a minor
sam> an
In message <00d501c264ae$1bf4f280$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:10:47
-0700, "Sam Leffler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
sam> 0.9.7 caused massive havoc compiling kerberos 4 (and to some
sam> extent 5) when I integrated beta 3 into the freebsd tree. The
sam> crypt() macro was a minor an
Sam Leffler wrote:
> 0.9.7 caused massive havoc compiling kerberos 4 (and to some extent 5) when
> I integrated beta 3 into the freebsd tree. The crypt() macro was a minor
> annoyance. The bigger problem was the redefinition of the DES key state
> block (from array to struct). openbsd apparentl
CTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 8:15 AM
Subject: Disabling the crypt() macro.
> I get reports again that the crypt() macro gets in the way for some
> applications. I'm strongly thinking of disabling it entirely. Anyone
> against?
>
> I
I get reports again that the crypt() macro gets in the way for some
applications. I'm strongly thinking of disabling it entirely. Anyone
against?
If I don't hear any complaints about the thought before the weekend,
I'll carry on with it, in 0.9.7 and 0.9.7-dev.
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannväg
