RE: [Perfparse-users] Trouble patching check_nt to get perf data

[Cook, G. <GW...@ma...>]

Clif,
It's been a while since I wrote that patch, and there were originally
some errors in my code that botched the memory check, although it did
enable the perfdata output correctly. However, this patch must be
applied against the original stable release, I don't know how it will
work against a CVS version of the stable code, which is what it appears
as though you've used below.
Also, perfdata and a few other things should be fixed in the latest CVS
version of the 1.4.0-alpha plugins. I would suggest that you use those.
If they don't work for you, send another email to the list, and perhaps
copy the nagiosplug-users list to increase the pool of users that might
be able to assist with the error.

Garry W. Cook, CCNA
Network Infrastructure Manager
MACTEC, Inc. - http://www.mactec.com/
303.308.6228 (Office) - 720.220.1862 (Mobile)

per...@li... wrote:
> First of all, thanks again for PerfParse.  I'm hoping once I get my
> ducks in a row with which plugins to use, etc., I'll replace
> APAN with it.
>=20
> I tried the check_nt plugin with what I assume is the latest
> build, but
> it didn't provide performance data.  I then tried to patch
> check_nt with
> the patch on your site, but receive the following:
> nagios-plugins-r1_3_0-200410041647]# patch plugins/check_nt.c
> check_nt.c.patch patching file plugins/check_nt.c
> Hunk #2 FAILED at 81.
> Hunk #3 FAILED at 140.
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 164.
> Hunk #5 FAILED at 202.
> Hunk #6 FAILED at 223.
> Hunk #7 FAILED at 255.
> Hunk #8 FAILED at 291.
> Hunk #9 succeeded at 406 (offset 54 lines).
> Hunk #10 FAILED at 599.
> Hunk #11 FAILED at 626.
> Hunk #12 FAILED at 636.
> Hunk #13 FAILED at 646.
> Hunk #14 FAILED at 666.
> 12 out of 14 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
> plugins/check_nt.c.rej=20
>=20
> Here's the contents reject file:
> ***************
> *** 78,89 ****
[snip]