From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 16 09:24:38 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D03E35C for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:24:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lokedhs@gmail.com) Received: from mail-la0-x230.google.com (mail-la0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99DEB190 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:24:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f48.google.com with SMTP id fq13so4054854lab.7 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 01:24:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AzPnCwgz3Vpnh7yoQq12/0QZ7yMNCjSq6wkB2GyKrVA=; b=dDm0aAiTcTFXOmsNGEZkKgxyksT0IcEBgJU2UbK6xn7OTdF649WTN3sinUnpAnQaOF fX/EQmgGR7e1fnYxFATtA1vBFs+6HNx3EtTJ1Wc+VKI7ruWIXiT5QSg5Bcr3Phrbp7Xx RVCI/15qUIhuCoVMlyncfsJCBLElzkX+ke25Jyv7A93401HOYRf1MFWZ1P0y1zHe7Mrv rRWB1jz3HPL+8vchVO5/yJfeUkRH1bV7Lih7LQ0hZAY4c88t1kL43UqrQEluUGazUXCT lXV3ggOfoOgaAv2HrbIIXEyck0+gvRsE81gwvaeCZlOLw3DoIoVxQalhcxOJc5JGt1yf 8bwg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.26.10 with SMTP id h10mr3193434lbg.63.1361006675850; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 01:24:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.41.68 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 01:24:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <336731055.3000548.1360798935813.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 17:24:35 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Possible bug in NFSv4 with krb5p security? From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Elias_M=E5rtenson?= To: Benjamin Kaduk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: Rick Macklem , freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:24:38 -0000 OK, here I am replying to my own email. I just want to mention that I removed the ports version of Heimdal, but with no change in behaviour. On 16 February 2013 09:38, Elias M=E5rtenson wrote: > > On 16 Feb, 2013 1:42 AM, "Benjamin Kaduk" wrote: > > > >> And yet one more thing: Heimdal ships with its own version of > libgssapi. I > >> can link gssd to it, but it won't run properly (it hangs pretty early)= . > > > > I have forgotten: you are using Heimdal from ports, not from the base > system? I remember it being easy to get into subtly-broken configuration= s > when both a ports and a base version are present. > > I am indeed using Heimdal from ports. This machine is also the KDC. I > wasn't aware that there was a non-ports version available. > > What do you suggest I do? Simply remove the one from ports? Do I have to > do something to activate the other one? > > (I have a hard time checking this as I am nowhere near the computers now) >