> On Mon, 24 May 2010 07:24:49 +0300, Omer Zak said:
OZ> The comments situation in Net-SNMP is grave.
Omer,
One of the key cool things about open source projects is that you can
take the code and do what you wish, assuming you follow the licensing
clauses attached to it. Thus, you're of co
On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 21:14 -0700, Steve Friedl wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 07:11:02AM +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
> > 2. Is anyone else in favor of forking the Net-SNMP project over the
> > comments issue?
>
> Forking a major project over *comments*?
Yes.
The comments situation in Net-SNMP is g
In view of the recent discussion about stripping comments off patches:
1. One of the issues is the fact that comments starting with // (rather
than enclosed by /* . . . */) are stripped off, rather than converted
from the first into the second.
The reason behind this is valid, although I doubt wh
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 07:11:02AM +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
> 2. Is anyone else in favor of forking the Net-SNMP project over the
> comments issue?
Forking a major project over *comments*?
--
Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 694-0494
[email protected] | Orange County,
Hi Hardaker
I want to upgrade it,but the version >=5.3 has a big problem...
If the tunnel or pppx device were recreated,so many snmp softwares can only
use old interface id to get the traffic data...
(they don't support interface name to be the index)
I know mrtg doesn't have this problem...but ma
On 22 May 2010 00:04, Doug Manley wrote:
> I recently realized that a patch that I submitted a year or two ago
> had been stripped of all of its comments (and thus a good deal of its
> usefulness). Granted, my fix (to prevent infinite looping) was kept,
> but all of the knowledge and reasoning be
www.hhj0.medstore-co.com
_
The amazing world in sharp snaps
http://news.in.msn.com/gallery/archive.aspx--
_
