On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 22:58, frank wrote:
> I do get error
> messages about the "exec" feature being deprecated
Actually, it's not "exec" that's being deprecated. It's the
*relocatable* form of "exec". A directive of the form:
exec name /my/prog -args
is fine. It's just the version:
exec .some.other.oid name /my/prog -args
that will run into difficulties.
The basic problem is that the MIB output that this produces
is fundamentally broken. It does not form a valid MIB table,
or a valid scalar group.
> and an incredibly vague
> pointer to "NET-SNMP-EXTEND-MIB" that allegedy describes the
> preferred method of doing what I'm doing.
There's an equivalent directive "extend" which works in the
same way as "exec", but formats the output somewhat differently.
In particular, the two entries:
extend name /my/prog -args
and extend .some.other.oid name /my/prog -args
will produce exactly the same structure of output
(unlike their "exec" alternatives), and this output
forms a legal MIB table (unlike "exec .OID ...")
Or rather it forms three parallel tables.
> P.S. If someone can explain to me how to craft my "alternative"
> exec call I'd really appreciate it.
If you're seeing this warning, then I think that means that
your agent includes "EXTEND-MIB" support. Try configuring
the following two entries in your snmpd.conf file:
exec .some.oid.1 test1 /your/prog -args
extend .some.oid.2 test2 /your/prog -args
(with the appropriate commands, obviously). It doesn't
matter what OIDs you use, but make sure they're different.
Then run
snmpwalk ... .some.oid.1
snmpwalk ... .some.oid.2
and compare the output. You should see that the second
form includes all the same information as the first, but
structured rather differently. There are also some things
that the second form provides which the first doesn't.
But this should be clear from comparing the output.
We would strongly suggest that you look at converting
your management scripts to this second approach. The first
(broken) form will be removed in due course. But we're
aware that this may well affect many people - hence the
warnings.
I'm sorry that you didn't find the warning text very
informative. Can you please suggest a better alternative?
Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans!
Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net
Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey
Click here to start! http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id=105hix
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
