[OpenAFS] asetkey: failed to set key, code 70354694

Marcus Watts mdw@umich.edu
Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:45:32 -0400

Ken Hornstein <kenh@cmf.nrl.navy.mil> writes:
> >> 
> >> "com_err sucks"
> >> 
> >> Well, more precisely "no 2 com_errs are alike"
> >> 
> >
> >Ok, so there is the whole com_err mess.  But openafs has
> >its own com_err so that "shouldn't" matter.
> asetkey is one of those programs that has to link against Kerberos 5
> as well as OpenAFS libraries.  So, which com_err should you link against?
> Neither one is perfect, unfortunately.
> --Ken

The com_err that's in the openafs distributions is particularly
problemmatical.  It's got all sorts of custom weirdness in

The com_err that's in any recent rxk5 patch is not perfect either, but
it's much closer to stock.  It should be quite close in overall behavior
to heimdal.  The base comparision logic that's in MIT is different
than heimdal & not useful for dealing with openafs error code ranges.
If you have static MIT libraries, you can supply a different libcom_err
and have it work (the one in rxk5 will work fine.)  If you have
dynamic MIT libraries, they pull in the MIT com_err, which is less
than ideal.

Some of the vendor flavors of kerberos; darwin at least, possibly
also solaris, do their own weird autoinitialization weirdness with
kerberos errors.  This is problemmatical also, at least so far as
sharing a common error table list goes.

				-Marcus Watts