(note to Bart: we're in voting mode for release candidates on the
trunk right now. Which means no one should be touching trunk without
discussion -coders first please. Thanks!)
Bart already applied this patches which means:
1) if it doesn't get +3 it will be reverted
2) we need to decide if
(note to Bart: we're in voting mode for release candidates on the
trunk right now. Which means no one should be touching trunk without
discussion -coders first please. Thanks!)
Bart already applied this patches which means:
1) if it doesn't get +3 it will be reverted
2) we need to decide if
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Wes Hardaker
harda...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
(note to Bart: we're in voting mode for release candidates on the
trunk right now. Which means no one should be touching trunk without
discussion -coders first please. Thanks!)
Bart already applied this
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Wes Hardaker harda...@users.sourceforge.net
wrote:
(note to Bart: we're in voting mode for release candidates on the
trunk right now. Which means no one should be touching trunk without
discussion -coders first please. Thanks!)
Bart already applied this
On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 17:03:06 +0200, Bart Van Assche bvanass...@acm.org
said:
BVA This change is safe because this function is new and its return value
BVA isn't used anywhere.
The safety of the change is now judged by the masses. We made this
policy quite a while ago because of changes that
On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 17:01:49 +0200, Bart Van Assche bvanass...@acm.org
said:
BVA How many changes have you committed after rc1 and that did not get
BVA a +3 ?
2. They had +2, though. So I took the the release manager has thea
ability to make decisions route because the due date for rc2 was
On Sat, 04 Sep 2010 02:01:22 +0200, Thomas Anders
thomas.and...@blue-cable.de said:
TA What about Robert's proposal to add a DEBUGMSG if the file/process
TA went away?
New patches to review welcomed :-)
--
Wes Hardaker
Please mail all replies to net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
On Sat, 04 Sep 2010 03:17:37 +0200, Thomas Anders
thomas.and...@blue-cable.de said:
TA Wes Hardaker wrote:
(and I tested it to make sure the functionality works as expected)
TA +1, then.
Ok, it didn't make it into rc2 because it didn't get +3 (and was
non-trivial). It'll get into rc3 if we
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Wes Hardaker
harda...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 17:03:06 +0200, Bart Van Assche
bvanass...@acm.org said:
BVA This change is safe because this function is new and its return
value
BVA isn't used anywhere.
The safety of the change is
Wes Hardaker wrote:
However the patch gets +1 for me
+1 from me as well.
+Thomas
--
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:
Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
Guys, good morning, how are you ?
Sorry to jump on you like this, but I am having a problem I think you may
know how to help me solving.
I have a script, running on a remote server, as a daemon.
And, sometimes, It crashes.
Ok, so I use Nagios and SNMP to return the info when it's down,
Hi!
I am trying to build net-snmp-5.5 on Windows-7 and am stuck at the point where
netsnmpmibssdk is to be built.
Build instructions that I followed are from
http://net-snmp.sourceforge.net/docs/README.win32.html -- 5. Build the
applications -- MS VC++ 7.0+:
Projects libagent, libhelpers,
Hello, fellows.
I am monitoring some remote servers and I need to monitor some file systems
where my servers are mounted from.
I am using this object: hrFSRemoteMountPoint
My doubt is: Does it test the mount point or does it simply check if the
mount point is tested ?
That doubt is due to a
Hi,
There is a strange behavior with the SNMP walker, if I perform the following
command:
snmpwalk -One -v2c -c public IP 1.3.6.1.4.1.4491.2.1.20.1.23
I receive this answer:
.1.3.6.1.4.1.4491.2.1.20.1.23.1.2.536870914.256 = Hex-STRING: 01 02 03 04
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 07:25:21PM +, Yehiel Samson wrote:
There is a strange behavior with the SNMP walker, if I perform the following
command:
snmpwalk -One -v2c -c public IP 1.3.6.1.4.1.4491.2.1.20.1.23
I receive this answer:
Wes Hardaker wrote:
However the patch gets +1 for me
+1 from me as well.
+Thomas
--
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:
Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
16 matches
Mail list logo