On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Harti Brandt wrote: > On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > DE>On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Dag-Erling [iso-8859-1] Smørgrav wrote: > DE> > DE>> Harti Brandt <hartmut.brandt_at_dlr.de> writes: > DE>> > I checked that gensnmptree does not generated these useless > DE>> > references since at least early 2001. > DE>> > DE>> The machine where I had this problem was running a two-week old > DE>> -CURRENT. > DE> > DE>Same here, give or take a few days. > > This seems to be exact the time when usr.sbin/bsnmp was detached from > world because of my misimport. This was from 2/14/2006 until 2/27/2006. > > I wonder how this happens... > > Ok. I think I got it. In Rev. 1.1.1.9 of gensnmptree.c I fixed a bug that > was discovered by jasone: the flag field of struct node was not > initialized to 0. This field contains the flags FL_GET and FL_SET. If both > of them are zero, nothing is emitted for that node - this is what should > happen to the nodes that reference the op_*dummy() functions. Even with > this bug the code happend to work, because this location was 0 with > phkmalloc. With the new malloc code the flag field contains obviously a > non-zero value. So if you have an old gensnmptree (which may happen > because the build of it was detached from world for some time) and a new > malloc, you end up getting these references. > > But for this to happen the build process also must use the installed > gensnmptree (because the newly compiled one would not have this bug). > > Can one of you verify that the new gensnmptree does the right thing?: > > cd /usr/src/usr.sbin/bsnmpd/gensnmptree > make clean > make > cd /usr/src/contrib/bsnmp/snmpd > .../gensnmptree <tree.def > grep dymmy tree.c > rm tree.c tree.h > > Replace ... by the path to the fresh gensnmptree. yes, that seemed to work. There are no references to dummy in the generated tree file. -- DEReceived on Wed Mar 08 2006 - 17:05:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:53 UTC