On 30/09/13(Mon) 14:17, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:51:47PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:01:10AM -0700, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:
Index: in6.c
===
RCS file:
On 19/09/13(Thu) 13:59, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
Diff below change the macros used to iterate over the multicast
records linked to an interface without using the global lists of
addresses.
These records are currently link to the first address descriptor,
respectively v4 and v6, even if they
Hi,
I just committed a simple SNMP client implementation to snmpctl/snmpd.
You can use it as an in-tree alternative to net-snmp's
snmpwalk/snmpget.
Examples:
$ snmpctl walk 127.0.0.1
$ snmpctl walk printer.my.domain version 1 oid printerWorkingGroup
$ snmpctl -n walk 203.0.113.240 oid ifMIB
On 2013/10/01 16:17, Reyk Floeter wrote:
Hi,
I just committed a simple SNMP client implementation to snmpctl/snmpd.
You can use it as an in-tree alternative to net-snmp's
snmpwalk/snmpget.
Examples:
$ snmpctl walk 127.0.0.1
$ snmpctl walk printer.my.domain version 1 oid
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Martin Pieuchot mpieuc...@nolizard.org wrote:
On 19/09/13(Thu) 13:59, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
Diff below change the macros used to iterate over the multicast
records linked to an interface without using the global lists of
addresses.
These records are currently
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:08:48PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
Most things are working fine for me.
thanks for testing!
v4 and v6 with opensnmpd OK (need two instances of the daemon
to test this as it only opens one socket).
v4 with net-snmp OK (v6 is possibly a bit broken in the
Some re(4) variants now use msi. Unfortunately the interrupt handler
isn't careful enough, and we might miss an interrupt. The diff below
seems to fix that by disabling the interrupts while processing an
interrupt. This is what FreeBSD Linux seem to do.
Needs testing on a wide variety of
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:26:20 -0700, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Whereas it remains to be seen what kind of bug I'm facing here
(Google reveals I'm not alone), it would appear that changes
introduced in 5.4-current would no longer cause spamd to report
such situation, because the 0 that
On 2013-W40-2 16:56 -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:26:20 -0700, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Whereas it remains to be seen what kind of bug I'm facing here
(Google reveals I'm not alone), it would appear that changes
introduced in 5.4-current would no longer cause
