Received: from brinza.cc.columbia.edu (IDENT:cu41754@brinza.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.8]) by krbdev.mit.edu (8.9.3p2) with ESMTP id QAA01123; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:43:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.13] (cpe-68-175-91-105.nyc.res.rr.com [68.175.91.105]) (user=jaltman mech=PLAIN bits=0) by brinza.cc.columbia.edu (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k8PKhU25025753 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <rt@krbdev.mit.edu>; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:43:30 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <45184012.4010804@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:46:10 -0400
From: Jeffrey Altman <jaltman@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rt@krbdev.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [krbdev.mit.edu #4237] SVN Commit
References: <rt-4237-18796.14.9314022346842@krbdev.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <rt-4237-18796.14.9314022346842@krbdev.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-No-Spam-Score: Local
X-Scanned-BY: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 128.59.29.8
RT-Send-Cc: 
X-RT-Original-Encoding: iso-8859-1
Content-Length: 698

Tom Yu via RT wrote:
>>>>>> "Sam" == Sam Hartman via RT <rt-comment@krbdev.mit.edu> writes:
> 
> Sam> If it is a completely unqualified name, like foobar_baz, then it is
> Sam> important that KFW and KFM do the same thing.  It's also important
> Sam> that if you change either the KFW or KFM behavior you discuss with
> Sam> Jeff or Alexis to confirm.
> 
> Do KfW and KfM currently do the same thing for un-prefixed names?  It
> looks like they do, but I wanted to make sure.
> 
> ---Tom

The code after the patch does the correct thing for Windows.  I might
question whether or not the drive letter test should be performed on
UNIX platforms.  I can't imagine it ever succeeding.

Jeffrey Altman