cross compiling using net-snmp-config

2010-03-31 Thread 생각하기
 Hi all... i  am going to cross compile subagent using net-snmp-config... I already installed net-snmp-5.3.2 on fedora11 === [r...@localhost net-snmp-5.3.2]# net-snmp-config --compile-su

Re: Processing invalid messages

2010-03-31 Thread Robert Story
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:48:25 -0700 Wes wrote: WH> RS> So we even want our bugs to be backwards compatible?? Don't WH> RS> think that I agree with that... WH> WH> If we believe that people are using a function for decoding a ASN range WH> that doesn't check the type of the variable (IE, int

Querying one subagent for different queries.

2010-03-31 Thread Hemant Soundankar
Hello ALL I have made a generic subagent which shall monitor different database servers. I have made one conf file which is being read at runtime when i fire any snmp query. That query file may contain only one word (either postgres or mysql). If suppose that on 1 m/c i have 2 database servers and

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Wes Hardaker
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:42:30 +0100, Dave Shield > said: DS> I'm not particularly bothered about the 5.2.x line, since this is DS> being shut down anyway, and we'd want to discourage people DS> from using it. But I'm strongly in favour of including some DS> form of this fix in the 5.4

Re: Processing invalid messages

2010-03-31 Thread Wes Hardaker
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:52:05 -0400, Robert Story > said: RS> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 20:19:02 -0700 Wes wrote: WH> > On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:15:39 -0400, Robert Story said: WH> WH> RS> IMHO, bug fixes trump backwards compatibility. WH> WH> Except when it's easy to fix by introducing

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Wes Hardaker
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:54:27 -0400, Robert Story > said: RS> sounds like a good place for a netsnmp_assert(). :-) Note that there are a few new macros now that improve netsnmp_assert to allow for returning a value when the assert condition is hit and a hard break isn't turned on by a

Re: Processing invalid messages

2010-03-31 Thread Robert Story
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 20:19:02 -0700 Wes wrote: WH> > On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:15:39 -0400, Robert Story said: WH> WH> RS> IMHO, bug fixes trump backwards compatibility. WH> WH> Except when it's easy to fix by introducing a new function instead that WH> leaves backwards compat with the old func

Re: CFV: Four new patches (was: Default AgentX target)

2010-03-31 Thread Robert Story
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:11:25 +0100 Dave wrote: DS> Is this ever going to happen? DS> The value 'multiplier' is based on either 'f_bsize' or 'f_frsize' DS> (scaled from bytes to kB) DS>Are either of these ever going to be zero? DS> DS> If so, the underlying system is probably fundamentally brok

Can't start snmpd as different user

2010-03-31 Thread Jan Safranek
Hi, I've stumbled upon a possible bug in net-snmp-5.5 in on Fedora 12: $ snmpd -f -Lo -u daemon initgroups failed: Operation not permitted Looking at strace and code in snmpd.c, I can see that the snmpd changed UID to daemon user, but subsequent initgroups() fails with EPERM. The cause is patch

Re: How to make snmp get non-blocking

2010-03-31 Thread Manjit
Ok, When i send Inform without discovery ( i.e the NULL EngineID ), the net-snmp internally send snmp GET to the secondary Manager. This SNMP get is also blocking. The idea behind sending an explicit GET request is to know the EngineID in advance before sending the inform. In my application i do

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Bart Van Assche
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Dave Shield wrote: > On 31 March 2010 09:44, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On most 64-bit systems sizeof(int) == 4 and on some others sizeof(int) == > 8. > > But what is the value of INT32_MAX on such systems? > I would expect that to be 0x7fff regardless of the

Re: CFV: Four new patches (was: Default AgentX target)

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
On 30 March 2010 20:32, Magnus Fromreide wrote: > a) It won't compile due to > >   if (x < (y / z) Argghhh!!! Thanks. > b) I would probably prefer the following since it makes sense to use >   a well known name and this define is located in an implementation >   file. > >   #ifndef INT32_MAX >

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
On 31 March 2010 09:44, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On most 64-bit systems sizeof(int) == 4 and on some others sizeof(int) == 8. But what is the value of INT32_MAX on such systems? I would expect that to be 0x7fff regardless of the value of sizeof(int) I may well be missing something here, but

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Bart Van Assche
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Dave Shield wrote: > On 31 March 2010 08:25, Bart Van Assche wrote: > >> MF> #ifndef INT32_MAX > >> MF> #define INT32_MAX 0x7fff > >> MF> #endif > > > It seems like some context information got lost in this discussion. The > > constant in 0x7fff in the so

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
On 31 March 2010 03:25, Wes Hardaker wrote: > Wa behind the times on this (sorry), but just FYI in case you > haven't dealt with them already. I've applied two-and-a-bit of the proposed patches. It's really only the latching of disk stats that is outstanding. > DS> 1) Latch disk statistics:

Re: CFV: Four new patches (was: Default AgentX target)

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
On 31 March 2010 07:49, Bart Van Assche wrote: > The code in the patch you posted will trigger a division by zero when > multiplier == 0. Is this ever going to happen? The value 'multiplier' is based on either 'f_bsize' or 'f_frsize' (scaled from bytes to kB) Are either of these ever going to

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
On 31 March 2010 08:25, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> MF> #ifndef INT32_MAX >> MF> #define INT32_MAX 0x7fff >> MF> #endif > It seems like some context information got lost in this discussion. The > constant in 0x7fff in the source file agent/mibgroup/ucd-snmp/disk.c > ... [refers] to the larg

Re: How to make snmp get non-blocking

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
On 31 March 2010 05:49, Manjit wrote: > I am running snmpd agent as a thread with some primary manager. > As a result of some actions agent gets a list of secondary managers IP > Address( But we dont know the engineID), > and we need to send informs to these managers. I believe that the Net-SNMP

Re: CFV: Four new patches

2010-03-31 Thread Bart Van Assche
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Wes Hardaker < harda...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:32:57 +0200, Magnus Fromreide < > ma...@lysator.liu.se> said: > > MF> b) I would probably prefer the following since it makes sense to use > MF> a well known name and this define i

Re: Re: [SPAM] cross compiling net-snmp-5.3.2

2010-03-31 Thread Dave Shield
2010/3/31 생각하기 > in FAQ > > if you want every one can use snmp... do like this > "cp MY-MIB /usr/local/share/snmp/mibs" > "export MIB=+ALL" That's for a default configuration, where everything is installed under "/usr/local". But the configure command you used included --prefix=/us