Bart Van Assche :
> I think that variable.magic is only needed if the old MIB registration API is
> used (register_mib() etc.). That API was deprecated more than ten years ago.
> I think that we should tell users to move away from that API rather than
> helping them with fixing the shortcomings of
Bart Van Assche :
> On 03/22/18 15:56, Keith Mendoza wrote:
> >Looking into using clang on Windows might be worth the effort to get
> >net-snmp code caught up to C99. Google Chrome now uses clang to
> >compile in Windows:
> >http://blog.llvm.org/2018/03/clang-is-now-used-to-build-chrome-for.html
>
On 03/22/18 10:37, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Bart Van Assche :
This patch changes a data structure in a public header file and hence breaks
the ABI. This is something we could do for Net-SNMP 5.8 since there has not
yet been any 5.8 release but it's something we can't do for older Net-SNMP
versions
On 03/22/18 15:56, Keith Mendoza wrote:
Looking into using clang on Windows might be worth the effort to get
net-snmp code caught up to C99. Google Chrome now uses clang to
compile in Windows:
http://blog.llvm.org/2018/03/clang-is-now-used-to-build-chrome-for.html
We do not only need a compiler
riginal Message-
From: Eric S. Raymond [mailto:e...@thyrsus.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 10:32 AM
To: Bill Fenner
Cc: Net-SNMP Coders
Subject: C99 (was: Re: Fix patch for SF bug 2833)
Bill Fenner :
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > On the oth
: Fix patch for SF bug 2833)
Bill Fenner :
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, I question whether the extra overhead is a real
> > issue in 2018.
>
>
> I have the same question, but know that I have no useful opini
Bart Van Assche :
> This patch changes a data structure in a public header file and hence breaks
> the ABI. This is something we could do for Net-SNMP 5.8 since there has not
> yet been any 5.8 release but it's something we can't do for older Net-SNMP
> versions.
I withdraw the suggestion.
Proced
Bill Fenner :
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, I question whether the extra overhead is a real
> > issue in 2018.
>
>
> I have the same question, but know that I have no useful opinion here - my
> "embedded system" ships with 4 gigs minimum, but
On 03/21/18 19:43, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
From 54e79ba66327bdb54f97f457d76531f657ec546d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Eric S. Raymond"
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 22:22:29 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] include/net-snmp/agent/{snmp_vars.h,var_struct.h}: address SF
bug 2833.
Are you familiar with "git
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> On the other hand, I question whether the extra overhead is a real
> issue in 2018.
I have the same question, but know that I have no useful opinion here - my
"embedded system" ships with 4 gigs minimum, but the project has more use
case
Bill Fenner :
> I don't think the patch is the issue. There are two questions to be
> addressed first:
>
> 1. For the embedded environment, is it acceptable to use an extra several
> bytes for this (or is there a way to rearrange the struct so that padding
> reduces the extra cost)?
A couple of
I don't think the patch is the issue. There are two questions to be
addressed first:
1. For the embedded environment, is it acceptable to use an extra several
bytes for this (or is there a way to rearrange the struct so that padding
reduces the extra cost)?
2. Is it reasonable to have more than 2
>From 54e79ba66327bdb54f97f457d76531f657ec546d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Eric S. Raymond"
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 22:22:29 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] include/net-snmp/agent/{snmp_vars.h,var_struct.h}: address SF
bug 2833.
Tests pass,
---
include/net-snmp/agent/snmp_vars.h | 2 +-
include/net
13 matches
Mail list logo
