On 08/05/12 21:32, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 10:41 +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
[ ... ]
The above patch looks ok, so +1 for it.
Thanks !
[PATCH] Make get_exec_output() work on big endian systems.
I have a hard time understanding why cachebytes and out_size have to be
On 5 August 2012 11:41, Bart Van Assche bvanass...@acm.org wrote:
--- a/agent/mibgroup/utilities/execute.h
+++ b/agent/mibgroup/utilities/execute.h
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
config_belongs_in(agent_module)
int run_shell_command(char *command, char *input,
- char *output,
On 08/06/12 07:18, Dave Shield wrote:
On 5 August 2012 11:41, Bart Van Assche bvanass...@acm.org wrote:
--- a/agent/mibgroup/utilities/execute.h
+++ b/agent/mibgroup/utilities/execute.h
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
config_belongs_in(agent_module)
int run_shell_command(char *command, char *input,
-
On 6 August 2012 08:34, Bart Van Assche bvanass...@acm.org wrote:
Doesn't this introduce a change in the API ?
That change restores the API to what it has always been before July 30,
2012 (see also commit 7374b84fe4c2ef8497fde3dae80a69aa89eba19c). So I'm
not breaking the API but restoring it
I'm working on an application using the net-snmp library (net-snmp-5.6-2). And
being curious, I took a look at the source code :-). Doing so I've mentioned
the use of errno to get information about failed calls to WinSock. For example
in snmpUDPBaseDomain.c:
...
rc = sendto(t-sock,
The update to agent/kernel.[ch] introduced just before pushing pre3 have
differing prototypes for klookup, and cannot compile.
I suggest the following change
--- a/agent/kernel.c
+++ b/agent/kernel.c
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ klread(char *buf, int buflen)
* @return gives 1 on success and 0 on
The configure test for pcre requires that you explicitly configure
--without-pcre if you are on a system without pcre support. Isn't this a
bit overreacting?
Actually, are there any reason to go for pcre for this, adding a
dependency that is not standard on BSD or Solaris (and probably AIX and
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 07:49:54PM +0200, Niels Baggesen wrote:
The configure test for pcre requires that you explicitly configure
--without-pcre if you are on a system without pcre support. Isn't this a
bit overreacting?
I have noticed that as well but not gotten around to fix it.