Bart Van Assche :
> I think that variable.magic is only needed if the old MIB registration API is
> used (register_mib() etc.). That API was deprecated more than ten years ago.
> I think that we should tell users to move away from that API rather than
> helping them with fixing the shortcomings of
Bart Van Assche :
> On 03/22/18 15:56, Keith Mendoza wrote:
> >Looking into using clang on Windows might be worth the effort to get
> >net-snmp code caught up to C99. Google Chrome now uses clang to
> >compile in Windows:
> >http://blog.llvm.org/2018/03/clang-is-now-used-to-build-chrome-for.html
>
On 03/22/18 12:22, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Bart Van Assche :
Hello Eric,
These are the only two tests that sometimes fail on my test setup. Whether
or not these tests pass depends on your DNS server. If I e.g. add
"nameserver 8.8.8.8" as the first entry in /etc/resolv.conf then these tests
pass
On 03/22/18 10:37, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Bart Van Assche :
This patch changes a data structure in a public header file and hence breaks
the ABI. This is something we could do for Net-SNMP 5.8 since there has not
yet been any 5.8 release but it's something we can't do for older Net-SNMP
versions
On 03/22/18 15:56, Keith Mendoza wrote:
Looking into using clang on Windows might be worth the effort to get
net-snmp code caught up to C99. Google Chrome now uses clang to
compile in Windows:
http://blog.llvm.org/2018/03/clang-is-now-used-to-build-chrome-for.html
We do not only need a compiler
Looking into using clang on Windows might be worth the effort to get
net-snmp code caught up to C99. Google Chrome now uses clang to
compile in Windows:
http://blog.llvm.org/2018/03/clang-is-now-used-to-build-chrome-for.html
Thanks,
Keith
-Original Message-
Subject: RE: C99 (was: Re: Fix
Bill Fenner :
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > Or possibly it might have but your build system messed me over. I don't
> > trust
> > autoconf as far as I can throw it.
> >
>
> I understand someone's done a conversion to cmake. Does that make you
> happier or vomit
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Or possibly it might have but your build system messed me over. I don't
> trust
> autoconf as far as I can throw it.
>
I understand someone's done a conversion to cmake. Does that make you
happier or vomityer?
Bill
---
Bill Fenner :
> Not to mention that "install libperl-dev" means nothing on Solaris, or
> FreeBSD, or MacOS, or other supported systems.
OK, but are you going to let the better be the enemy of the good, or merge that
patch and improve on it based on your experience?
I'm not throwing these doc patc
Bart Van Assche :
> On 03/21/18 19:47, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> >>From 2ffbdd9e8f15eb3e3dc985ab3aa0a12d798e4b78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >From: "Eric S. Raymond"
> >Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 20:24:40 -0400
> >Subject: [PATCH] INSTALL: Fix for build instructions.
> >
> >Mention a prerequisite that w
Bart Van Assche :
> Hello Eric,
>
> These are the only two tests that sometimes fail on my test setup. Whether
> or not these tests pass depends on your DNS server. If I e.g. add
> "nameserver 8.8.8.8" as the first entry in /etc/resolv.conf then these tests
> pass on my setup. I think the reason i
net-snmp is expected to build on Windows, which gpsd does not; it's not
clear how much this impacts compiler choice.
-Original Message-
From: Eric S. Raymond [mailto:e...@thyrsus.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 10:32 AM
To: Bill Fenner
Cc: Net-SNMP Coders
Subject: C99 (was: Re: Fix
Bill Fenner :
> So before, you meant you failed test 31 of the "com2sec directive" suite?
I'm not even sure that's what I saw. My apologies, I'm new to this code and
the test output is somwhat confusing.
> Try "cd testing; SNMP_VERBOSE=2 ./RUNFULLTESTS -v -r T070com2sec" to get
> more detail abou
Bart Van Assche :
> This patch changes a data structure in a public header file and hence breaks
> the ABI. This is something we could do for Net-SNMP 5.8 since there has not
> yet been any 5.8 release but it's something we can't do for older Net-SNMP
> versions.
I withdraw the suggestion.
Proced
Bill Fenner :
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, I question whether the extra overhead is a real
> > issue in 2018.
>
>
> I have the same question, but know that I have no useful opinion here - my
> "embedded system" ships with 4 gigs minimum, but
On 03/21/18 20:41, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Ian and I note that the test suite seems a bit compromised.
Hello Eric,
When running compile tests and the test suite I think it is a good idea
to enable as many Net-SNMP features as possible. You may want to have a
look at the attached shell scripts
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 03/21/18 19:47, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
>> - 3) make
>>>
>> + 3) Run make. If the build fails with a complaint that it can't resolve
>> + -lperl, install libperl-dev and try again.
>>
> This should be elaborated further: anoth
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Keith Mendoza wrote:
Hi,
> I'm one of the volunteer developers with ICEI (please see email with
> subject "ICEI asks what help you need" for details). I was attempting
> to compile net-snmp code with -std=c99 compiler option, and the
> compiler failed with "error:
On 03/21/18 19:43, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
From 54e79ba66327bdb54f97f457d76531f657ec546d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Eric S. Raymond"
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 22:22:29 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] include/net-snmp/agent/{snmp_vars.h,var_struct.h}: address SF
bug 2833.
Are you familiar with "git
On 03/21/18 19:47, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
From 2ffbdd9e8f15eb3e3dc985ab3aa0a12d798e4b78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Eric S. Raymond"
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 20:24:40 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] INSTALL: Fix for build instructions.
Mention a prerequisite that will trip people up under Ubuntu.
---
On 03/22/18 05:33, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Now I'm getting a different result, which is a little disturbing in itself:
com2sec directive (Wstat:
256 Tests: 31 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 30
Non-zero exit status: 1
Files=76, Tests=327, 109 wa
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> On the other hand, I question whether the extra overhead is a real
> issue in 2018.
I have the same question, but know that I have no useful opinion here - my
"embedded system" ships with 4 gigs minimum, but the project has more use
case
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Bill Fenner :
> > By "test 31" do you mean "snmpv1 traps are sent by snmpd API"?
>
> Now I'm getting a different result, which is a little disturbing in itself:
>
> com2sec directive
> (Wstat: 256 Tests: 31 Failed: 1)
> Failed test: 30
Bill Fenner :
> I don't think the patch is the issue. There are two questions to be
> addressed first:
>
> 1. For the embedded environment, is it acceptable to use an extra several
> bytes for this (or is there a way to rearrange the struct so that padding
> reduces the extra cost)?
A couple of
Bill Fenner :
> The configure script test can fail if you've regenerated it using autoconf
> but not using 2.68.
Running 2.69.
I never ran autoconf explicitly, just configure as per instructions.
> By "test 31" do you mean "snmpv1 traps are sent by snmpd API"?
Now I'm getting a different result
I don't think the patch is the issue. There are two questions to be
addressed first:
1. For the embedded environment, is it acceptable to use an extra several
bytes for this (or is there a way to rearrange the struct so that padding
reduces the extra cost)?
2. Is it reasonable to have more than 2
I have an unofficial Travis build setup; in it the only tests that fail are
because the Travis environment seems to not have even localhost IPv6
available: https://travis-ci.org/fenner/net-snmp
The configure script test can fail if you've regenerated it using autoconf
but not using 2.68.
By "test
27 matches
Mail list logo
