MS>1.[ 956272 ] Solaris hostres hrPartitionSize values 8 times too big
>
>Its a clean patch. The description draws concerns.
MS>The patch should not be committed until the issues you've raised in the
patch's description are resolved.
MS>Does the patch work for all Solaris2 ? Which versions have been tested ?
Solaris 2.6, 7 and 8 on sun4u and sun4m.
MS>What would be the robust way for Net-SNMP to determine dynamically
if LARGEFILE feature is supported on the system ?
e.g., you mention the patch is "this cheat". What impact does cheating
offer ?
MS>Can interested readers live with an unofficial patch until an expert
in the ways of Solaris2 can vouch for the method to detect
when LARGEFILE applies and how to change the calculation appropriately ?
I was barking up the wrong tree when I was talking about LARGEFILE support,
as I explained further down.
The issue is really
u_long f_bsize; /* preferred file system block size */
u_long f_frsize; /* fundamental filesystem block
(size if supported) */
fsblkcnt_t f_blocks; /* total # of blocks on file system
in units of f_frsize */
It looks like what I REALLY should be testing for is
STRUCT_STATVFS_HAS_F_FRSIZE and incorporating that (perhaps even
cross-platform if relevant) rather than goofing around with LARGEFILE stuff.
That's how it's being handled in agent/mibgroup/host/hr_disk.c and
agent/mibgroup/ucd-snmp/disk.c so I don't understand how it got overlooked
in hr_filesys.c.
I've changed the #ifdef solaris2 to read #ifdef STRUCT_STATVFS_HAS_F_FRSIZE
>
MS> 2.[ 944029 ] Perl with Solaris
>
(dealt with separately)
>
> 3.[ 910094 ] Solaris can only see some disks
>
> This one is a bit tricker. At present, on Solaris (probably others), it
> only believes in controller 0 and 1. Most Solaris boxes have more
> controllers than that. Bumping this value up too high causes a segfault
for
> reasons I don't quite follow.
I think its because Add_HR_Disk_entry writes past the end of that fixed
array
you've been asking about recently.
I've been looking at several arrays. I don't think it's the one with
MAXDISKS.
Anybody remember? I've been through the archives and I can't see it.
>
> Nevertheless this patch.
> is a partial compromise that works at least for me. It gives you more
> (0-7), but doesn't (AFAIK) segfault.
Add_HR_Disk_entry should adjust the array as needed.
This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to which it is
addressed, and may contain confidential, personal and or privileged
information. Please contact us immediately if you are not the intended
recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute, or take action
relying on it. Any communication received in error, or subsequent reply,
should be deleted or destroyed.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X.
>From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the
one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and
evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
