On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 21:09, Robert Story wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 17:07:36 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> I've come up with the following list of required tasks facing such
> DS> a helper. What else (or different) would it need to provide?
> DS>
> DS> SNMP-request handling:
> DS> - register (
On Thu, 05 May 2005 17:07:36 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> I've come up with the following list of required tasks facing such
DS> a helper. What else (or different) would it need to provide?
DS>
DS> SNMP-request handling:
DS> - register (and unregister) the table
DS> - add or remove a row to/fr
Dave> I've come up with the following list of required tasks facing such
Dave> a helper. What else (or different) would it need to provide?
Dave> SNMP-request handling:
Dave> - register (and unregister) the table
Dave> - add or remove a row to/from the table
Dave> - retrieve the row relating to a
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 17:07:36 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dave> I've come up with the following list of required tasks facing such
Dave> a helper. What else (or different) would it need to provide?
Dave> SNMP-request handling:
Dave> - register (and unregister) the table
Dav
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 17:03, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> Dave> /*
> Dave> * NOTE NOTE NOTE: This helper isn't complete and is likely to
> Dave> * change somewhat over time. Specifically, the way it stores
> Dave> * data internally may change drastically.
> Dave> */
>
> Dave>
> On Tue, 03 May 2005 16:43:59 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dave> /*
Dave> * NOTE NOTE NOTE: This helper isn't complete and is likely to
Dave> * change somewhat over time. Specifically, the way it stores
Dave> * data internally may change drastically.
Dave> */
Dave> *That'
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 18:42, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> Anyway, I think we've never told people not to mess with the table
> structures and have even provided a few examples of being able to do
> so.
I *knew* there was something nagging me about this statement,
and I've just clicked what it was. There
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 18:45, Robert Story wrote:
> I've run out of energy for this argument.
Most important thing first.
I'm sorry if I've been pushing you too hard on this
issue, Robert. I know how frustrating it can be when
you're trying to explain something that seems so obviously
right, and t
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 18:28, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> Dave> can I suggest that we add suitable wrappers to
> Dave> table_data and table_dataset now.
> Dave> If we then provide the same APIs for the
> Dave> table_data2/table_dataset2 helpers, that should make the
> Dave> transition significan
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:52:45 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 00:47, Robert Story wrote:
DS> > Think of table_container as a cake. The container conf
DS> > is red frosting.
DS>
DS> I'd regard the mib2c.container.conf as describing the bare
DS> cake. It doesn't imply any frosting at all
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:31:37 -0700 Wes wrote:
WH> Robert> Like he's paying any attention.
WH>
WH> You 2 do tend to ramble on a bit ;-)
/me falls off his chair..
WH> [...] I shouldn't need to read these discussions ;-)
WH>
WH> Of course I think I just proved I do anyway.
Gee, thanks for nothing
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:57:14 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dave> The public API for supplying index values has always been
Dave> via netsnmp_table_row_add_index.
Dave> That's my understanding anyway - Wes, care to correct any
Dave> errors?
Well, this is where we frequently d
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:16:36 -0400, Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
DS> That's my understanding anyway - Wes, care to correct any errors?
Robert> Like he's paying any attention. I'd be willing to be when he
Robert> sees a thread between us that starts to get long, he stays as
Robert>
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:39:59 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dave> In which case, can I suggest that we add suitable wrappers to
Dave> table_data and table_dataset now. Keep the same internals (so
Dave> not to break backward compatability), but provide a cleaner API.
Dave> Bett
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 00:47, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:11:53 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> I think that, like it or not, the
> DS> introduction of this config file *has* effectively
> DS> defined an API for the table_container helper.
>
> Just because a mib2c conf fil
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 00:52, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:00:51 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> In general, I'd tend to agree - I don't believe that the instance
> DS> handler is particularly useful.
> DS> But this is one of Wes' helpers, so I'm reluctant to simply
> DS> drop it.
> Don'
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:00:51 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 15:44, Robert Story wrote:
DS> > However, it leaves me wondering why we shouldn't just merge the two.
DS> > When would one ever use the instance handler?
DS>
DS> a) I dunno, ask Wes. That's one of his
Ok. Wes?
DS> b)
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:11:53 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> > DS> And there's been a 'mib2c.container.conf' generator since 5.2.
DS>
DS> which I wrote following my experiences with describing that
DS> particular helper in TBB. I think that, like it or not, the
DS> introduction of this config file *has* ef
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 15:16, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:57:14 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> http://www.net-snmp.org/dev/agent/group__table__container.html
> That describes the handler. Note that there is a single function described -
> to
> get the handler. One function does not an
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 15:44, Robert Story wrote:
> However, it leaves me wondering why we shouldn't just merge the two.
> When would one ever use the instance handler?
a) I dunno, ask Wes. That's one of his
b) If (for some unexplained reason) you wanted
to implement a table one elemen
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:57:14 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> > DS> In terms of public API, the main difference between table_data
DS> > DS> and table_container is in terms of how the indexing is handled.
DS> >
DS> > Actually, the real difference is that table_container doesn't have
DS> > an API at all.
DS>
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:12:17 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> The same holds true for GET requests for sys{Contact,Location}.1
DS> or sys{Contact,Location}.0.99, etc, etc. In each case, an
DS> implementation using the instance handler would return the
DS> wrong exception ('noSuchObject'), while the scalar h
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:52, Robert Story wrote:
> DS> Compare with scalar vs instance helpers. The scalar helper
> DS> is basically just a wrapper round the instance helper.
> DS> That works fine, IMO.
>
> Easy for you to say, you wrote them!
Actually, the instance helper is one of Wes'.
I wrot
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:52, Robert Story wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:02:13 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> In terms of public API, the main difference between table_data
> DS> and table_container is in terms of how the indexing is handled.
>
> Actually, the real difference is that table_container do
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:02:13 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 16:41, Robert Story wrote:
DS> > All you've done in the container version of table_data is internally
DS> > provided the structure that the table container expects. I having nothing
DS> > against that. All I'm suggesting is th
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:47:27 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dave> I knew that stepping through the table_data lists would fail,
Dave> but that never felt to be pushed as a user-level helper.
I can't think of any case, except in the emulator that we were
providing as well, wher
On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 16:41, Robert Story wrote:
> All you've done in the container version of table_data is internally provided
> the structure that the table container expects. I having nothing against that.
> All I'm suggesting is that the API be part of table_container instead of
> table_data2.
On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 18:49, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Dave> I knew that stepping through the table_data lists would fail,
> Dave> but that never felt to be pushed as a user-level helper.
>
> I can't think of any case, except in the emulator that we were
> pr
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:56:03 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> Quoting Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
DS> > I was thinking that mayb table_data2/table_row could just go away.
DS> > It's really just a few wrapper functions around table_container,
DS> > so I'd say move those functions into table_container, an
Quoting Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I was thinking that mayb table_data2/table_row could just go away.
> It's really just a few wrapper functions around table_container,
> so I'd say move those functions into table_container, and do away
> with table_data2.
Nope. Not in favour of that.
T
Quoting Wes Hardaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> But, in fact, the reason I changed it
> back was because you had committed code that I was positive
> would break existing people's code out there.
> All of their code was going to be non-compilable in the
> future which I didn't
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:41:47 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> Quoting Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
DS> > DS> I never much liked the 'data/dataset' names anyway.
DS> > DS> If we're going to change them, I'd like a say in what to!
DS> >
DS> > I can pretty much guarantee that there won't be any issue with
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:41:47 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I think this was an executive decision by Wes because:
>>
>> 1) the table token was broken
>> 2) no easy way to fix 1 in container version
>> 3) work influences needed a working cvs, ASAP
>> 3) new container version
On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 16:57, Robert Story wrote:
> I believe so. I seem to recall that it broke the snmpd.conf 'table' token.
> Wes also pointed out that anyone wanting to look at the data itself would have
> been using the linked list pointers, thus breaking backwards compatibility.
Hmmm wher
Wes,
I'm just getting back up to speed with what's changed
with the development code during my sabbatical, and noticed
that you've backed out the container-based "table_data"
helper, moving this into a separate helper.
The CVS commit message mentions problems with backward
compatibility - can
Quoting Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> DS> Hmmm where was this discussed?
>
> I think this was an executive decision by Wes because:
>
> 1) the table token was broken
> 2) no easy way to fix 1 in container version
> 3) work influences needed a working cvs, ASAP
> 3) new container version
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:29:44 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> I'm just getting back up to speed with what's changed
DS> with the development code during my sabbatical, and noticed
DS> that you've backed out the container-based "table_data"
DS> helper, moving this into a separate helper.
DS>
DS> The CVS c
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:03:33 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 16:57, Robert Story wrote:
DS> > I believe so. I seem to recall that it broke the snmpd.conf 'table'
DS> > token.
DS>
DS> Hmmm where was this discussed?
I think this was an executive decision by Wes because:
1) the tabl
38 matches
Mail list logo
