On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 16:02:29 -0500 Olsson, wrote:
OS> RS> Also, you changed the priority such that external events are 
OS> RS> handled before snmp events. The order shouldn't change.
OS> 
OS> The reason I did this is because snmp_read() didn't return the count of
OS> events left to be processed.  netsnmp_external_fd_read() does do this
OS> so I changed the order.[...] I wanted to avoid changing snmp_read()
OS> prototype and fix this bug/anomaly at the same time.  Let me know if you
OS> still want me to revert the order.

Yeah, I figured as much. But it's a change in behaviour without a really good
reason. You definitely can't change snmp_read, so we'll just have to live
with the slight inefficiency. 

OS> RS> I think those are the only problems. However, I also have suggestions, 
OS> RS> if you are feeling ambitious.
OS> 
OS> Well I was given about a week to work on this so when I finish the patch
OS> for snmp trap publishing I may take a look.  All the suggestions look 
OS> good to me.

No problem if you don't get to them. Just ideas I would use if I had the time
for a re-write.

-- 
Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie
Support: <http://www.net-snmp.org/> <irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp>
Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-coders>

You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different. 


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to