On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 12:46:29 +0200 Tommy wrote:
TC> John P. Looney wrote:
TC> > exec .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.51 memfree /usr/local/bin/memfree$
TC> > exec .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.100 disk1 /usr/local/bin/diskused /$
TC>
TC> The .100 OID is already used by "ucd-snmp/versioninfo", so you cannot
TC> just hi-jac
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 12:46:29PM +0200, Tommy Christensen mentioned:
> I guess the one in netsnmp_register_old_api() could just be removed, but
> I haven't checked all possible error paths in the code (!!).
Heh. I thought it might be something like that. Dumb admin does something
stupid, and fi
John P. Looney wrote:
exec .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.51 memfree /usr/local/bin/memfree$
exec .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.100 disk1 /usr/local/bin/diskused /$
The .100 OID is already used by "ucd-snmp/versioninfo", so you cannot
just hi-jack that one - but how would anybody know that ?!
I think a playing-ground subt
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 11:48:16AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] mentioned:
> I could not reproduce the problem with net-snmp-5.1.2, using
> an "snmpd.conf" containing only these two lines:
>
> exec / .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.100 disk1 /usr/local/bin/diskused /
> rwcommunity public
>
> From the information y
I could not reproduce the problem with net-snmp-5.1.2, using
an "snmpd.conf" containing only these two lines:
exec / .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.100 disk1 /usr/local/bin/diskused /
rwcommunity public
>From the information you've provided (thank you!),
it seems to me that the config reading process is refer
