> I know of, but am not that familiar with, mrtg. I thought it used
> perl-snmp for its data collection. Is this not correct?
That's right, mrtg uses perl-snmp but you can create custom scripts
which are used to generate statistics for other values than traffic.
For these scripts many people (i
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 02:40:30PM -0400, Gerhard Poul wrote:
> > IMHO, the snmpget, snmpwalk, etc., utilities are best used for testing
> > and debugging agents. If you wan to do real network management, you
> > should probably be using scotty, perl-snmp or something similar which
> > provide pro
> In practice, you're likely to find that release notes for the unstable
> distribution change so infrequently that people ignore them until it's
> too late. People often do things like upgrading daily.
poor people... but there are some people out there who try to use debian
in production systems
> IMHO, the snmpget, snmpwalk, etc., utilities are best used for testing
> and debugging agents. If you wan to do real network management, you
> should probably be using scotty, perl-snmp or something similar which
> provide programatic support. Of course, I'm biased since I developed
> commercia
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:29:09PM -0400, Gerhard Poul wrote:
> > Correct. In fact, I didn't think people were using much more than
> > snmpd.
>
> I don't want to blame _anyone_ for this. I just want to discuss that
> issue to make debian better in the future.
>
> How do you think people get th
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:21:55PM -0400, Gerhard Poul wrote:
> > If you think a package should be doing this then file a bug against the
> > package. Possibly with severity wishlist if it's not crippling, just
> > annoying.
> IMHO it is much better to have a central list of changes in the rel
> Perhaps. It's been my experience, though, that changing the package
> name just upsets a different set of users. In other words, it's a no
> win situation.
I also don't like this way because it is confusing after an upgrade but
it might be a reasonable workaround.
> > Since the maintainer (Da
> If you think a package should be doing this then file a bug against the
> package. Possibly with severity wishlist if it's not crippling, just
> annoying.
IMHO it is much better to have a central list of changes in the release
notes because it is much more user friendly to run apt-get upgrad
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 10:59:52AM -0400, Gerhard Poul wrote:
> What can be done for people like me who want to report on such problems and
> what can be done for maintainers who want to document such changes but
> don't know how?
The general method is to display a message during the upgrade (thi
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:36:55PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> 1. I agree the change from CMU to UCD snmp should have been better
> documented. Perhaps the maintainer should have made it more obvious
> by calling the UCD package "ucd-snmp", as he named the source package.
Perhaps. It's been m
> > please take a look at http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_34.html#SEC34 in
> > the gnu coding standards. I think such a utility is barely needed by debian
> > and maybe also other distributions. _user_ _visible_ changes are _worth_
> > to be documented.
>
> That link points to an explanation a
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:53:59AM -0400, Gerhard Poul wrote:
> > To summarize the bug: the logging behavior of the snmp package changed
> > when we switched from CMU SNMP to the UCD implementation.
> Yes, the user interface which might be used by many people of an
> essential remote monitoring to
> To summarize the bug: the logging behavior of the snmp package changed
> when we switched from CMU SNMP to the UCD implementation.
Yes, the user interface which might be used by many people of an
essential remote monitoring tool changed without any notice by the
system administrator. (and it is
On Aug 04, Gerhard Poul wrote:
> The message in this bug might be interesting for you. (I hope so)
>
> I think this is really important for a distribution but some of the
> maintainers seem to disagree with me in this point.
To summarize the bug: the logging behavior of the snmp package changed
The message in this bug might be interesting for you. (I hope so)
I think this is really important for a distribution but some of the
maintainers seem to disagree with me in this point.
Please read the thread and reply to this bug in the bug tracking system
or discuss this on the qa mailing lis
15 matches
Mail list logo
