Hello,
One of the advantages of github over SourceForge is that integration
with continuous integration (CI) services like Travis and Appveyor is
easy. Adding such support however requires to add proper configuration
files and the necessary scripts in the source tree. Hence this patch. As
one
Net-SNMP dev team,
I have submitted a merge request to verify that when the
--enable-blumenthal-aes is used in configure that it checks that OpenSSL's
aes.h and evp.h are available. Merge request is at
https://sourceforge.net/p/net-snmp/code/merge-requests/14/. This should fully
resolve the fol
On 04/25/18 10:04, Keith Mendoza wrote:
Net-SNMP dev team,
I have submitted a merge request to verify that when the
--enable-blumenthal-aes is used in configure that it checks that OpenSSL's
aes.h and evp.h are available. Merge request is at
https://sourceforge.net/p/net-snmp/code/merge-reques
Bart,
Out of curiosity, do you have a "fork" of Net-SNMP on github to connect it to
Travis and Appveyor?
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, at 8:06 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Hello,
>
> One of the advantages of github over SourceForge is that integration
> with continuous integration (CI) services like Tr
Bart,
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 04/25/18 10:04, Keith Mendoza wrote:
> > Net-SNMP dev team,
> > I have submitted a merge request to verify that when the
> > --enable-blumenthal-aes is used in configure that it checks that OpenSSL's
> > aes.h and evp.h are avai
On 04/25/18 11:54, Keith Mendoza wrote:
Out of curiosity, do you have a "fork" of Net-SNMP on github to connect it to
Travis and Appveyor?
Hello Keith,
If you are looking for a Net-SNMP repository on github, please use
https://github.com/net-snmp/net-snmp. I hope Wes will connect that
repos
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, at 11:05 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 04/25/18 11:54, Keith Mendoza wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, do you have a "fork" of Net-SNMP on github to connect it
> > to Travis and Appveyor?
>
> Hello Keith,
>
> If you are looking for a Net-SNMP repository on github, please use
On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:06:28 -0600 Bart wrote:
BVA> One of the advantages of github over SourceForge is that
BVA> integration with continuous integration (CI) services like
BVA> Travis and Appveyor is easy. Adding such support however
BVA> requires to add proper configuration files and the necessar
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:31:13 -0500 Ian wrote:
IB> This morning we (Keith, Ian) met with an assortment of the
IB> NET-SNMP developers / contributors (primarily Bart Van Assche)
IB> to discuss how we could best help the project. The meeting went
IB> well, at least form our perspective.
I'm sorry I m
On 04/25/18 12:58, Robert Story wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:06:28 -0600 Bart wrote:
BVA> One of the advantages of github over SourceForge is that
BVA> integration with continuous integration (CI) services like
BVA> Travis and Appveyor is easy. Adding such support however
BVA> requires to add pr
On 04/25/2018 02:08 PM, Robert Story wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:31:13 -0500 Ian wrote:
IB> * clean up headers in /include/net-snmp/system/ which are a
IB> mess and have import loops
IB>
IB> * #ifdef hell / too many supported configurations
I'm a little nervous about these one, especially wi
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, at 12:08 PM, Robert Story wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:31:13 -0500 Ian wrote:
> IB> This morning we (Keith, Ian) met with an assortment of the
> IB> NET-SNMP developers / contributors (primarily Bart Van Assche)
> IB> to discuss how we could best help the project. The meeti
Just want to see where everyone is regarding 5.8 release. Other than what's
listed in the 5.8pre2 announcement are there any other features that will go
into 5.8?
Other that the bugs I filed last week from running the test suite against
master branch, are there any bugs that are part of 5.8?
D
Robert Story :
>And as far as supported configurations, we're
> very big on backwards compatibility.
I think you are spending more effort on this than field conditions justify.
And there is a cost you probably have not audited.
I learned my Unix programming chops back in t
On 04/25/18 13:08, Robert Story wrote:
IB> * clean up headers in /include/net-snmp/system/ which are a
IB> mess and have import loops
IB>
IB> * #ifdef hell / too many supported configurations
I'm a little nervous about these one, especially with folks that are
new to the code base. And as far as
Bart Van Assche :
> Which of the following files under include/net-snmp/system do you think are
> still relevant today? No changes other than trivial changes have been made
> to these files in the past ten years:
>
> dynix.h irix.h osf5.h svr5.h ultrix.h
LOL. I've seen this movie before. It's ve
Wow, these are names from the past; I find it hard to believe there is any
legitimate need to support these going forward.
Steve - who's ported to almost all of those platforms
-Original Message-
From: Eric S. Raymond [mailto:e...@thyrsus.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 8:25 PM
To:
17 matches
Mail list logo