Daniel Lacey wrote:
> I am looking into purchasing MS Visual "something". From the net-snmp
> docs, I went looking for Visual C++.
> I went to the MS product site and found the free Visual C++ 2005 Express
> Edition.
>
> Would this be able to compile a working net-snmp?
It should compile with V
Dave Shield wrote:
> On 08/01/07, Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How about the attached patch?
>
> Looks good to me.
Checked in (with a necessary include added).
+Thomas
--
Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de)
---
On tor, 2007-01-11 at 18:05 +0100, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 05:24:40PM +0100, Radek Vokál wrote:
> >
> > I'm sending you a patch which fixies the issue for me. This is Fedora
> > Core 6 and RHEL5 issue. Net-snmp 5.3.1 and 5.4
>
> I am against this patch since it breaks w
Wes Hardaker wrote:
>> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> TA> How much of the snmpv3/usmUser core code could likely be reused in a new
> TA> implementation with one of those two helpers?
>
> Probably just the case statement that figures out the right values for
> a given co
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> Dave Shield wrote:
>> The distinction between libagent and libhelpers doesn't feel as useful
>> as that between these two and libmibs
TA> Merging them is significant work, too. So if it's *possible* to separate
TA> them cleanly, why not
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> How much of the snmpv3/usmUser core code could likely be reused in a new
TA> implementation with one of those two helpers?
Probably just the case statement that figures out the right values for
a given column.
Everything else will need
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> @Core Developers: please use autoconf 2.61 (or later) to regenerate
TA> configure in MAIN from now on. Installing it (in parallel) is considered
TA> almost trivial.
If we're going to suggest 2.61 or plead, we should require it in the
cod
> "MF" == Magnus Fromreide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MF> The attached patch makes it possible to build snmplib/ with a c++
MF> compiler as well as a c89 compiler.
and 5.4 branches
--
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.
-
Take S
> "MF" == Magnus Fromreide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MF> The attached patch makes it possible to build snmplib/ with a c++
MF> compiler as well as a c89 compiler.
FYI, applied to main.
--
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.
-
T
> "MF" == Magnus Fromreide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MF> * chunk 2 in snmpUDPDomain.c which makes it stop using C99 struct
MF> initialization at the cost of doing actual assignments.
I actually always wondered at the portability of those anyway. It's
probably safer.
MF> * chunk 4 in snmpS
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:05:04 +0100 Magnus wrote:
MF> I am against this patch since it breaks with not-so-old linux versions.
I agree...
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay pane
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 05:24:40PM +0100, Radek Vokál wrote:
> Thomas Anders wrote:
> >Radek Vokál wrote:
> >>Hi, I can't figure out where the problem. Net-snmp doesn't configure
> >>with ethtool because the following test crashes
> >>
> >>configure:20372: checking for linux/ethtool.h
> >>configur
Thomas Anders wrote:
Radek Vokál wrote:
Hi, I can't figure out where the problem. Net-snmp doesn't configure
with ethtool because the following test crashes
configure:20372: checking for linux/ethtool.h
configure:20394: gcc -c -DINET6 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -f
Radek Vokál wrote:
> Hi, I can't figure out where the problem. Net-snmp doesn't configure
> with ethtool because the following test crashes
>
> configure:20372: checking for linux/ethtool.h
> configure:20394: gcc -c -DINET6 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
> -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protec
[ First - *please* don't mail me privately, without copying
any responses to the mailing list. I don't have the time
or inclination to offer private, unpaid, SNMP consultancy.
Keep discussions to the list, where others can both learn
and offer advice. Thanks. ]
On 11/0
Hi, I can't figure out where the problem. Net-snmp doesn't configure
with ethtool because the following test crashes
configure:20372: checking for linux/ethtool.h
configure:20394: gcc -c -DINET6 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4
On 10/01/07, Breton, Marc-André <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When using snmpbulkwalk, I saw that only 10 values were included per
> responding packet. I'd like to know if there's a way to manually increase
> that limit. I searched in the options but I didn't find a way to change this
> parameter. I
Hello,
When using snmpbulkwalk, I saw that only 10 values were included per responding
packet. I'd like to know if there's a way to manually increase that limit. I
searched in the options but I didn't find a way to change this parameter. I'd
like to change it to decrease my application response
Thomas,
I tried your approach.
I reproduced the coredump using Net-SNMP 5.4. The stack trace is below:
Thanks,
Mark
NET-SNMP version: 5.4
Web: http://www.net-snmp.org/
Email: [email protected]
#0 netsnmp_add_varbind_to_cache (asp=0x8187958, vbcount=1,
varbind_ptr=0x815bc9
19 matches
Mail list logo
