Hi Trond,
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 07:39:32AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
My intention is not to make "RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 optional for NFSv4". First
I saw a build failure and then I wondered if the fix was optimal. After
reading the log of 827e345 I thought NFSv4 doesn't depend on
RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5, still more considering that 827e345 was your fix after
I suggested to select CRYPTO to enforce RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 again.
Currently you can have NFSv4 without RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 because if you
don't have CRYPTO RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 is off, too, even if it defaults to
yes and there's no prompt. (Selecting would not work, too.)
And note that RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 already selects SUNRPC_GSS, so 827e345
doesn't do anything useful if NFS_V4 really needs RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5.
So either we should really enforce RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 if NFS_V4 is selected
(by letting one of these select CRYPTO, see e.g. my first patch, or by
letting NFS_V4 depend on CRYPTO) or make it optional in all cases (as it
is already now in some cases).
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--