Re: Our aging base system krb5 [heimdal]

>I would love for it to go away entirely, and those base-system
>components that depend on it to learn how to use either Kerberos
>implementation from ports.  (I'd also love for the ancient and broken
>base version of libcom_err to go away -- there's no knob to turn it
>off, and the shared library conflicts with ports/krb5.)

I think that would please a lot of people -- but is the project still
committed to having a Kerberos implementation as one of a few
important applications in the base system, so that users don't have to
rely upon ports?  Would relegating it to ports mean that Kerberos
would be disabled by default in base system utilities, so that the
base system is self-hosting?  What incompatibilities exist between
that latest versions of the MIT Kerberos and Heimdal implementations?
How does des_at_ feel about it, since libpam and openssh may have to be
altered?

b.