Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-22 Thread Magnus Fromreide
On fre, 2006-10-20 at 08:44 -0400, Robert Story wrote: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:25:49 +0100 Dave wrote: > DS> On a slightly different note - should we (i.e. Net-SNMP) consider > DS> adjusting the default location of the persistent directory? A quick > DS> perusal of the FHS specs would indicate th

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-20 Thread Robert Story
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:25:49 +0100 Dave wrote: DS> On a slightly different note - should we (i.e. Net-SNMP) consider DS> adjusting the default location of the persistent directory? A quick DS> perusal of the FHS specs would indicate that we should perhaps be DS> using /var/lib/net-snmp. DS> Or i

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-19 Thread Roland Stigge
Magnus Fromreide wrote: >> If this imposes any kind of serious problem, please describe, or even >> better: File a bug against the net-snmp package in Debian. Then we can >> sort it out. > > It is mostly a problem since any reasonable agentx implemntation would suppose > that the well known path i

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-19 Thread Roland Stigge
Magnus Fromreide wrote: >> I'd have thought this is something that should be raised with either >> the AgentX working group, or the FHS people. I've been subscribed to >> the AgentX list for several years, and can't recall seeing any mention >> of this problem. And a quick search of the FHS list

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-18 Thread Magnus Fromreide
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:25:49PM +0100, Dave Shield wrote: > On 18/10/06, Roland Stigge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It looks like someone had to choose between breaking the > > /var/agentx/master convention and the FHS (no new subdirectories under > > /var without FHS consultation). > > > If

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-18 Thread Magnus Fromreide
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:57:10PM +0200, Roland Stigge wrote: > Hi, > > Thomas Anders wrote: > >>> /MF (I do think Debian should stop violating RFC2741) > >> Does it? Please point me to the respective areas. > > > > I think Magnus refers to t

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-18 Thread Roland Stigge
Thomas Anders wrote: >> It looks like someone had to choose between breaking the >> /var/agentx/master convention and the FHS (no new subdirectories under >> /var without FHS consultation). > > As for "FHS consultation", there's an open bug in FHS's Bugzilla on this: > > http://bugs.freestandard

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-18 Thread Dave Shield
On 18/10/06, Roland Stigge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It looks like someone had to choose between breaking the > /var/agentx/master convention and the FHS (no new subdirectories under > /var without FHS consultation). > If this imposes any kind of serious problem, please describe, or even > bett

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-18 Thread Roland Stigge
Hi, Thomas Anders wrote: >>> /MF (I do think Debian should stop violating RFC2741) >> Does it? Please point me to the respective areas. > > I think Magnus refers to the AgentX socket path. From RFC2741: > > 8.2.1. Well-known Values > >The master agent

Re: AgentX socket path

2006-10-18 Thread Thomas Anders
Roland Stigge wrote: > It looks like someone had to choose between breaking the > /var/agentx/master convention and the FHS (no new subdirectories under > /var without FHS consultation). As for "FHS consultation", there's an open bug in FHS's Bugzilla on this: http://bugs.freestandards.org/show_

AgentX socket path (was: Re: [Fwd: Re: [Pkg-net-snmp-devel] Bug#389434: MIBs in net-snmp])

2006-10-18 Thread Thomas Anders
Roland Stigge wrote: > Magnus Fromreide wrote: >> /MF (I do think Debian should stop violating RFC2741) > > Does it? Please point me to the respective areas. I think Magnus refers to the AgentX socket path. From RFC2741: 8.2.1. Well-known Values The master agent creates a