>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:41:16 -0400, Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

Robert> While investigating a recent problem report on a 64 bit issue,
Robert> I discovered that the function snmp_set_var_value() doesn't
Robert> really do much error checking on the values passed to it. On
Robert> the other hand, snmp_varlist_add_variable() does fairly
Robert> extensive error checking, including dealing with integers that
Robert> are a different size than longs (eg some 64 bit systems).

Robert> The old_api wrapper uses snmp_set_var_value, and thus some
Robert> handlers were using a 4 byte value, which the asn build
Robert> routines would choke on.

Robert> So I have a patch that basically moved the extra checking into
Robert> snmp_set_var_value(), and updates snmp_varlist_add_variable to use
Robert> snmp_set_var_value().

Robert> Any objections?

Um, no I guess not as long as you're only adding functionality and
detracting from it, which based on your description of the patch
sounds like its the case?

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games.
Get your fingers limbered up and give it your best shot. 4 great events, 4
opportunities to win big! Highest score wins.NEC IT Guy Games. Play to
win an NEC 61 plasma display. Visit http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to