On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:21:45 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 15:50 -0400, Robert Story wrote:
DS> > I'd argue
DS> > that it should be in the default list, and config_require used to weed
DS> > out bits that don't have OS support. That's probably too much work, so
DS> > it might just be easier to just do known good architectures.
DS>
DS> The trouble is that if we don't start pushing it onto "broken" systems,
DS> very little will happen. The HostResources implementation is some
DS> eight years old now, and development has been sporadic at best.
DS> SIGH!
DS>
DS> I'm not sure what timescale we're thinking of for 5.3, but it may
DS> well be a little late to push this now. So you're probably right: for
DS> 5.3, just enable it on known good architectures.
Do we know what those are? I start the list ;-)
Linux
DS> But once that's out, we should perhaps consider enabling it by
DS> default on the main development line, and wait for the complaints
DS> (and fixes?) to come flooding in.
Agreed.
DS> The other thing that might help is a move towards greater use of
DS> the Hardware Abstraction Layer that I started to put in place a
DS> couple of months ago. It currently only covers CPU and memory
DS> (and only for Linux boxes), but it's a step in the right direction.
What a coincidence... I was just getting ready to compose a message on this. I
still will, instead of cluttering this thread.
DS> > Would that include any functional changes that would affect users?
DS>
DS> In terms of snmpd.conf configuration - probably not.
DS> There are a few aspects of the existing directives that might
DS> need to be tweaked slightly, but I'd expect to keep things
DS> backward compatible.
DS> The most visible changes would probably affect the contents
DS> of the MIB tables that were produced as a result - particularly
DS> with the linkage between the trigger tables and event entries.
DS>
DS> Given that most people probably don't manipulate these directly,
DS> then I doubt this would be particularly significant.
So it's ok to enable it by default?
--
NOTE: messages sent directly to me, instead of the lists, will be deleted
unless they are requests for paid consulting services.
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.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
