On 7/20/06, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Andrew Beekhof wrote:> On 7/20/06, Lars Marowsky-Bree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2006-07-20T14:40:20, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I do believe that it is needed. Several thing require it now. > > > but they're all supposed to be optional components right? > > > > Yes. > > cool - can the person/people that look after > lib/plugins/stonith/apcmastersnmp.c figure out some way to allow the > build to pass when no SNMP is available then? As I say, it works for me routinely on Solaris (which tends to lack SNMP and other such goodies). So I wonder whether you are seeing an effect local to yourself (for some reason)? The source directory has: apcmaster.c apcmastersnmp.c A typical Solaris object directory here has only the "apcmaster.*o*" variants, (i.e. not the "apcmastersnmp.*o*"). So it does successfully detect and build non-SNMP for me. One of my Linux object dirs is also like this; but another includes the "apcmastersnmp.*o*" variants. So (for me) it builds successfully in the presence or absence of SNMP. Thus the logic would seem to be (mostly) correct. But perhaps you have uncovered a particular instance in which it is incorrect or incomplete. Tracing this back up: "lib/plugins/stonith/Makefile.am" has the section: if USE_APC_SNMP apcmastersnmp_LIB = apcmastersnmp.la else apcmastersnmp_LIB = endif So this "USE_APC_SNMP" thing needs to be correct. In "configure.in", this seems to be set according to "$ENABLE_SNMP". And "$ENABLE_SNMP" is set according to the presence of various ".h" files and a couple of other things. Admittedly its default value is an optimistic "yes" and perhaps it might be better to invert this to a default "no".
or better yet, expose it as a regular configure option.
Look in "configure.in" around line 1000 (line: ENABLE_SNMP="yes"). Perhaps temporarily insert a "set -x" here, and a corresponding "set +x" about 50 lines later; re-create "configure" and run it to see what route it takes throught that section. Chance are it will end up (for you) still with 'ENABLE_SNMP="yes"' for some reason, when your system probably requires a "no" result. So could you then either dream up a small additional test to do that, or perhaps (more major) rework the logic to a default "no"? Hope that helps, Andrew. All the best. -- : David Lee I.T. Service : : Senior Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : Durham University : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/ South Road : : Durham DH1 3LE : : Phone: +44 191 334 2752 U.K. : _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
_______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
