On 20.04.06 Thomas Anders ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Hilmar Preusse wrote:
Hi all, > >>So should we go for linux and unknown as platform? Or always > >>unknown? > >> > >I've upstream in Cc. Ask them for either updating the MIB or go for > >unknown. > > Can you please give your exact platform details? > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ uname -a Linux kloetzer 2.6.16-1-686 #2 Sat Apr 15 20:45:20 UTC 2006 i686 GNU/Linux What else do you need? > "unknown" should cover any system not mentioned explicitely before: > No "hurd" in there. How big is the chance that the net-snmp coders will expand the MIB zu define another OID for Hurd? > A sysObject.0 value of 1.3.6.0.0.0.0.0.0.0 should not happen. > Well, this is exactly what this bug^1 is about. I've installed the snmpd package from Debian and used the default configuration. Result: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ snmpget -v2c -c public 127.0.0.1:161 .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.2.0 SNMPv2-MIB::sysObjectID.0 = OID: SNMPv2-SMI::dod.0.0.0.0.0.0.0 . I've rebuilt the package from the sources and got the same result. The configure options of the package do not manipulate the sysObjectID. So this can be either: - a broken patch in the Debian package, or - an upstream bug. As we see the same behavior on FreeBSD, I guess the latter is the case. Regards, Hilmar ^1 http://bugs.debian.org/363399 -- sigmentation fault -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
