Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:52836 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751261AbdCTFII (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Mar 2017 01:08:08 -0400 From: NeilBrown To: Daniel Pocock , Niels Thykier , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, 852395@bugs.debian.org, Robbie Harwood Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:07:40 +1100 Cc: Debian kernel team Subject: Re: Bug#852395: unblock: gssproxy/0.5.1-2 In-Reply-To: References: <148524180980.26332.422684345851896222.reportbug@kirtar> <8ed20c71-d7e2-72e1-a8ce-c913f8e0fffd@thykier.net> <17e5fbd0-9bb1-d7fa-6056-8adbda8a1f4d@pocock.pro> <5df78805-b791-0a5e-3dcb-99792d78c3bd@thykier.net> Message-ID: <87o9wwcz8j.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Sun, Mar 05 2017, Daniel Pocock wrote: > On 05/03/17 19:42, Niels Thykier wrote: >> On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:58:00 +0000 Niels Thykier wrote: >>> Daniel Pocock: >>>> [...] >>>> >>>> Upstream is not really supporting rpc.svcgssd any more, they actually >>>> disabled it in the build so people can still have it as a transitional >>>> measure in stretch. >>>> >>>> People shouldn't be using it in any new installations. Offering them >>>> gssproxy is a very sensible thing to do. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Daniel >>>> >>> Debian kernel team >>> Ok, follow up questions: >>> >>> * Do you have an upstream reference to the state of rpc.svcgssd? > > > http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=steved/nfs-utils.git;a=commit;h=24b5d60d7f0a514310df810e3eb27b72f665febf > > "svcgssd: Disable support for the rpcsec_gss server by default > > At this point the gssproxy is better option than the > svcgssd so the support is off by default. > > Use --enable-svcgss to re-enable the support" > > but it looks like it may not be completely abandoned, there have been > other commits that mention gssd recently. > > >>> >>> * Can we provide both rpc.svcgssd and gssproxy in Debian (with the >>> admin choosing) or is it an "xor"? >>> > > I think there are two questions: > > a) can they both exist in different packages that conflict with each > other? I'm guessing that will probably be yes. > > b) can they both be installed simultaneously? Possibly not (can anybody > on the linux-nfs list answer?) Yes, they can. The systemd unit files are designed so that svcgssd will only be started if gssproxy didn't start - and gssproxy is tried first. If you use something other than systemd, similar logic would be needed. NeilBrown > > >>> * If this package is unblocked, are there any changes needed in >>> nfs-common needed to support gssproxy? (source upload, binNMU or >>> "just works with no further changes") >>> > > I don't have time to investigate that right now, if anybody else has > time to look more closely that would be great. > > Regards, > > Daniel > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEG8Yp69OQ2HB7X0l6Oeye3VZigbkFAljPY50ACgkQOeye3VZi gbnNNA/9HBVdo5HtOfI5gLSfvIYwf8LdNDUDsUNs47qn2/aqxEsmVPr2yAzRaUzM wNl/J4soS202XnsyqzhACeZufFMGshQjCGY1opX4Af4jocJeItIx0MsHbPmDUq5S a5XZbO4ch3D8KpQnYexB36CrkpLPDtHfNvsaNK81+2NRzY/9LY1PRxizQUj+xe7x MyLfNlmvpA7WvwkgDnFymwQST+1XoIQWVuNcPiBthzCWMcSo5wRy7eIWXET7ld9c hk0bL//aa240tzCfFNwqs/wkT/mo31eq+A+4g+jilptC2+6yB1Xj3Y1z1PChSWkP RpXtwWCxWJXUR00jJ985liKgqcO5FgPQAZgMBuEcUeKp+XucY1MX64ri2oz8bgrJ fwdmu6bQFlmMdzRrxD5tHB7lazpJsIX6TY55HE1ww3iTWe5nuEqpN4EO+fPBosXQ b8oWyWPELTRNwxt42GL93CiJLe1AWiRfi8jy+19vlJuno6v1SP6SG9ct5Ltynlc8 gkvA8z+FvYaazO5VCFtZ+jldwgQWX2yGhLxynWpX6kSyXR2bIX5KaF0d0IQUCPF2 VHAJ9DXrZoct0W0D8M4ALQUPmEjeAShtGa7QFdlCzouVld8824NESMrGsDWF8LRm DyNy0C+ldY294sKryImsUnRLc9clsrgTuju4oX3yvy3Lj93BLuo= =DJyF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--