Hi, maintainers Any update about these patches?
Zhu Yanjun On 12/04/2013 04:48 PM, yzhu1 wrote: > On 12/02/2013 12:53 AM, Magnus Fromreide wrote: >> On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 11:24 +0800, yzhu1 wrote: >>> On 11/26/2013 02:58 PM, Magnus Fromreide wrote: >>>> On Tue, 2013-11-26 at 11:05 +0800, yzhu1 wrote: >>>>> Hi, Magnus >>>>> >>>>> Follow your advice, I made the 3 new patches. Now the patches are >>>>> in the >>>>> attachment. Please check them. >>>>> Thanks a lot. >>>> Are that really the new patches? >>>> It seems all the issues I spoke about are still present. >>>> >>>> /MF >>>> >>>> >>> Hi, Magnus >>> >>> To now, there are 7 patches in total. >>> >>> 0001-snmpTargetParams-supports-zero-OID.patch <----support zero OID >>> in snmpTargetParams >>> 0002-fix-param-length.patch <----fix a defect which result from params >>> length >>> 0003-conf-support.patch <----support save/restore zero OID in conf file >>> 0004-use-params-hex-string-as-index.patch <----use params >>> hex string as index in tlstmparams >>> 0005-use-nameData-hex-string-as-index.patch <----use namedata >>> hex string as index in tlstmaddr >>> 0006-replace-nameData-with-nameDate-hex-string-in-log.patch <----use >>> hex >>> string of namedata in log >>> 0007-Use-paramsLen-to-replace-params.patch <----fix a bug since >>> params == NULL can not exactly suggest that params has no value >>> >>> After these 7 patches are applied, net-snmp can work well to now. >>> Please comment these patches and merge them. >> Thanks for the patch collection - that made it easier to review them. >> >> #6 and #5: >> * An SnmpAdminString is no more than 255 octets, so the tmp >> buffer >> is unnecessarily big, maxlen * 2 + 2 (0x) + 1 (\0) = 513 bytes >> is enough. >> * I still fail to understand why you prefer to write 1024 >> NUL's to >> the tmp buffer before reading the value instead of writing a >> single NUL to it after having read the value, and in the >> case of >> read_config_save_octet_value the output is a NUL-terminated >> string in any case so there is no reason for it at all there. >> #4: >> * A variant of #6 and #5. The buffer to >> read_config_save_octet_string is not big enough at only 512 >> bytes. >> * Tricky and Important: Earlier the value FOO matched a string >> with value FOO but with your patch it matches the string "FOO". >> This changes the interface of the agent. > Hi, Magnus > > I do not understand > > * Tricky and Important: Earlier the value FOO matched a string > with value FOO but with your patch it matches the string "FOO". > This changes the interface of the agent. > > So I do not modify anything. > > I modified these patches according to other comments. Now these > patches are in the attachment. > Please check them. > > Best Regards! > Zhu Yanjun >> Thanks for doing this work. >> >> /MF >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
