From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-04-23 21:48:40
|
Patches item #2751588, was opened at 2009-04-11 05:11 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by tanders You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=312694&aid=2751588&group_id=12694 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Anders Persson (apersson) Assigned to: Thomas Anders (tanders) Summary: Inconsistent data can be reported on Solaris 10U4+ Initial Comment: Due to an interface change, there is a size mismatch between the statistics returned from the kernel and what's expected by net-snmp. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Thomas Anders (tanders) Date: 2009-04-23 23:48 Message: SVN Rev. 17554. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Thomas Anders (tanders) Date: 2009-04-23 23:48 Message: Thanks for the patch! It has been applied to the 5.2.x, 5.3.x and 5.4.x code branches and the main development tree, and will appear in future releases of the Net-SNMP package. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Anders Persson (apersson) Date: 2009-04-23 23:26 Message: LEGACY_MIB is more appropriate, as it is only defined on S10U4+, which is the only time we need to set req->len = 1. Using SOLARIS_HAVE_RFC4293_SUPPORT would set the value on OpenSolaris systems (which is harmless, but still). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Thomas Anders (tanders) Date: 2009-04-23 23:00 Message: No, I didn't apply this patch yet. Instead, SVN trunk (5.5-to-be) has a different fix for this issue from 2007 (r16436). It uses SOLARIS_HAVE_RFC4293_SUPPORT instead of LEGACY_MIB_SIZE to decide whether to set req->len=1. 5.4.x and earlier have no such fix at all. @apersson: What define is more appropriate? I'll make sure we use that in all branches, then. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Wes Hardaker (hardaker) Date: 2009-04-23 01:26 Message: tanders has apparently applied this patch already, though he didn't say so here. So I'm saying it and closing it :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=312694&aid=2751588&group_id=12694 |