On 2/10/11, Wes Hardaker wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:01:32 +0100, Martin Buck
>> said:
>
> MB> I don't know what original problem that warning was meant to solve, but
> MB> wouldn't it be easier to just drop it?
>
> I agree, it's not too helpful. The discussion was from quite a whil
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 15:14 +, [email protected] wrote:
> Revision: 19920
> http://net-snmp.svn.sourceforge.net/net-snmp/?rev=19920&view=rev
> Author: dts12
> Date: 2011-02-10 15:13:59 + (Thu, 10 Feb 2011)
>
> Log Message:
> ---
> CHANGES: snmplib: PATCHES
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 08:40 -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:01:32 +0100, Martin Buck
> > said:
>
> MB> I don't know what original problem that warning was meant to solve, but
> MB> wouldn't it be easier to just drop it?
>
> I agree, it's not too helpful. The discu
On 10 February 2011 19:12, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> IMHO, the separation between the two is a good thing. Making them align
> gives less control to the user for "getting out of a mess".
Fair enough.
I started by asking "should we do this?"
which then became "can we do this?"
I'm quite happy if t
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:12:45AM -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:23:41 +, Dave Shield
> > said:
>
> DS> Ctrl-\
> DS> gives the same output as using Ctrl-C to kill the agent.
> DS> (using read_config as a convenient way of tracking
> DS> shutdown processing)
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:23:41 +, Dave Shield
> said:
DS> Ctrl-\
DS> gives the same output as using Ctrl-C to kill the agent.
DS> (using read_config as a convenient way of tracking
DS> shutdown processing)Without the patch, I get
And what happens when we're stuck in an infinite
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:12:11AM -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:56:39 +, Dave Shield
> > said:
>
> DS> Wes - is it worth trying to catch SIGQUIT,
> DS> and handling this in a similar way to SIGINT.
>
> I don't think you can do that.
It's certainly possible
On 10 February 2011 17:12, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> DS> Wes - is it worth trying to catch SIGQUIT,
> DS> and handling this in a similar way to SIGINT.
>
> I don't think you can do that.
The following patch seems to do the trick.
With this, running
snmpd -f -Le -Dread_config
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:56:39 +, Dave Shield
> said:
DS> Wes - is it worth trying to catch SIGQUIT,
DS> and handling this in a similar way to SIGINT.
I don't think you can do that.
--
Wes Hardaker
Please mail all replies to [email protected]
--
On 10 February 2011 16:41, Wes Hardaker wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:24:01 +0530, Abraham Varricatt
>> said:
>
> AV> I usually stop the agent with "Ctrl + \" .
> When you use ctrl-\ it never lets the agent properly do "its thing" to
> shutdown, like save data, etc.
Yup - that would
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:24:01 +0530, Abraham Varricatt
> said:
AV> I usually stop the agent with "Ctrl + \" . And I hate to tell you this, but
AV> Ctrl-C is a bad way of stopping the agent. At least, with net-snmp 5.5,
AV> whenever I used that, the agent would quit, but still leave lock
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:01:32 +0100, Martin Buck
> said:
MB> I don't know what original problem that warning was meant to solve, but
MB> wouldn't it be easier to just drop it?
I agree, it's not too helpful. The discussion was from quite a while
ago and I agree it's probably not worth
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 09:42:31AM -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> I ended up applying the first (the one that removes the call from the
> perl module itself). I agree it's redundant (now) to have it in there.
Thanks a lot!
> I think the proper thing to do would be to do this and also have command
13 matches
Mail list logo
