Kerberos vs. ARLA libs

[Assar Westerlund]

Tino Schwarze <tino.schwarze at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> writes:
> libeditline and libsl get installed as shared libraries and I'd like to
> use them that way.

I have updated the libeditline in arla a little while ago so it's now
identical with the one in krb4/heimdal.  I'm also working on doing the
same thing with libsl.

> Further, I find it a bit annoying and counter-productive to have almost
> similar libs within two projects as it will lead to forking sooner or
> later.

Right.

> What about libacl.so, librx.so, librxkad.so etc.?

libacl, I dunno about, not much is happening with that.
librx, is only included in arla so there's no conflict there.  There
should be separate distribution with this but that's for later.

librxkad's differences are really tiny and some things need to be done
differently, or is it unclear on how to do them.  But the plan is of
course to merge them.

Then there's roken, and the plan there as Love said is to take a
current roken and drop it in arla, the only problem being getarg.

/assar