> On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:10:43 +0200, "Martin Carlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Martin> I noticed in the first patch you assumed times() wraps to 0,
Martin> didn't you?
Actually, in the first patch I tried to be ambivalent, as I wasn't
sure it'd be the same on all systems.
Martin> Putting
This last one even I understand :-).
I noticed in the first patch you assumed times() wraps to 0,
didn't you?
Putting together the original patch I assumed times()
wraps to INT_MIN. It would make more sense (to me) if it wrapped
to 0 (makes the -1 fault code return value more understandable).
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:15:32 -0700, Wes Hardaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Wes> Yep. It's a known annoying bug. Unfortunately, the reason I
Wes> haven't applied it is that I haven't had the time. The patch
Wes> proposed is better but also suffers from additional problems:
A much better p
> On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:00:52 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael J. Slifcak) said:
Michael> lcd_time.c - include sys/times.h should be wrapped
Michael> with HAVE_SYS_TIMES_H
Thanks. Actually its not needed at all. Removed.
Michael> no need for commenting time(NULL) when it is replaced with
> On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:20:53 -0400, Robert Story (Coders) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
Robert> 1) The return value of snmpv3_local_snmpEngineTime appears to
Robert>have changed from seconds to centi-seconds.
Doh. Don't write code at 11:00pm. Don't write code at 11:00pm.
Don't write
Wes Hardaker wrote:
>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:15:32 -0700, Wes Hardaker
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Wes> Yep. It's a known annoying bug.
>
> Grr Non-painless to solve. Here's my current thinking. I'd love
> it if someone would check the concepts in it. My brain hurts at this
>
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:42:12 -0700 Wes wrote:
WH> Grr Non-painless to solve. Here's my current thinking. I'd love
WH> it if someone would check the concepts in it.
I won't pretend that I understand what the patches are doing, but I have a few
comments:
1) The return value of snmpv3_local_s
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:19:54 -0700, "Jeff Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Jeff> Back in April, Martin Carlsson of Lumentis observed in the
Jeff> thread entitled "engineTime and abrupt timechanges" that changes
Jeff> to the system time could prevent the agent from authenticating
Jeff> snmp
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:19:54 -0700 Jeff wrote:
JJ> Back in April, Martin Carlsson of Lumentis observed in the thread
JJ> entitled "engineTime and abrupt timechanges" that changes to the system
JJ> time could prevent the agent from authenticating snmpv3 messages
JJ> (reference
JJ> http://sourceforge
Hi, Jeff. Have you taken this idea (consistent timestamp handling)
further ?
Discussion is good, and patches are appreciated, too!
Jeff Johnson wrote:
Back in April, Martin Carlsson of Lumentis observed in the thread
entitled "engineTime and abrupt timechanges" that changes to the system
time cou
Back in April, Martin Carlsson of Lumentis observed in the
thread entitled “engineTime and abrupt timechanges” that changes to
the system time could prevent the agent from authenticating snmpv3 messages
(reference
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=8116151).
In a subseq
11 matches
Mail list logo
