On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Dave Shield wrote:
> On 23 June 2010 16:15, Leonardo Chiquitto wrote:
>> I just realized that v1 traps generated by "snmptrap" do not respect the
>> address set in "v1trapaddress". I understand this is expected because
>> the configuration option is exclusive to t
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:01:33 +0100, Dave Shield
> said:
DS> Anything defined in is part of the "internal API",
DS> which is made accessible on an "at risk" basis.
I think you've done a great job moving stuff around so there is finally
a line in the sand, fuzzy or not. We should prob
On 24 June 2010 15:19, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
>> Firstly, I would regard 'range_list' as an internal data structure,
>> rather than part of the public API, so it would be legitimate (IMO)
>> to tweak this as part of a new major release.
>
> I agree with this but think we should remove the struc
>Hi All
>
>I need your help to fix the following issue for Solaris box:
>$ /usr/local/sbin/snmpd -f -Le
>Segmentation Fault
>$
># /usr/local/sbin/snmpd -f -Le
>Segmentation Fault (core dumped)
>#
Can you read the following web page and hopefully it'll help you get
more information you can
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:14:55 +0200, Jan Safranek
> said:
JS> I'd try to avoid such flags if possible... What about #ifdef
JS> HAVE_INT64 and HAVE_STRTOLL, i.e. using int64_t and strtoll if
JS> available and int as fallback?
The other option that we know is portable is to use the inter
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Dave Shield wrote:
> On 23 June 2010 21:11, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> > I think r17794 fixed this issue.
>
> As far as I can tell, revision 17794 is purely concerned with how
> ranges are *displayed* as part of dumping MIB structures.
Correct.
> [Remov
On 06/24/2010 11:06 AM, Dave Shield wrote:
> Two comments.
> Firstly, I would regard 'range_list' as an internal data structure,
> rather than part of the public API, so it would be legitimate (IMO)
> to tweak this as part of a new major release.
> Hence it might be possible to make such a c
On 23 June 2010 16:15, Leonardo Chiquitto wrote:
> I just realized that v1 traps generated by "snmptrap" do not respect the
> address set in "v1trapaddress". I understand this is expected because
> the configuration option is exclusive to the agent (ie, set in snmpd.conf).
>
> Is this something wo
On 23 June 2010 21:11, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> I think r17794 fixed this issue.
As far as I can tell, revision 17794 is purely concerned with how
ranges are *displayed* as part of dumping MIB structures.
This doesn't seem to affect how the values are actually handled internally.
The technique
Hi All
I need your help to fix the following issue for Solaris box:
$ /usr/local/sbin/snmpd -f -Le
Segmentation Fault
$
# /usr/local/sbin/snmpd -f -Le
Segmentation Fault (core dumped)
#
--
GAURAV SHARMA
--
ThinkGeek
10 matches
Mail list logo
