#43009: [update] net-snmp 5.7.2.1 + improvements ------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: net-snmp | ------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by yngwie.chou@…): Note the following line for snmpd executable is incorrect: startupitem.executable ${prefix}/'''bin'''/snmpd -c ${prefix}/etc/snmpd.conf 127.0.0.1 actually snmpd will be installed in ${prefix}/'''sbin''' instead of ${prefix}/bin -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43009#comment:1> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#43009: [update] net-snmp 5.7.2.1 + improvements ------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: net-snmp | ------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by yngwie.chou@…): Replying to [comment:2 jul_bsd@…]:

sorry. fix. I add also pid file but for some unknown reason, still get in system.log

{{{ Mar 30 14:55:07 host com.apple.launchd[1] (org.macports.net-snmp): Throttling respawn: Will start in 10 seconds }}}

Not sure if using daemondo will be a good idea. If I run snmpd without launchctl or daemondo, no above log will be reported. Also, I found that if I run snmptrapd with launchctl either with or without deamondo, the following log will be reported: Apr 1 00:46:35 host snmptrapd[23524]: couldn't open udp:162 -- errno 48 ("Address already in use") and a tiny suggestion for the plist name: Sicne the net-snmp package also contains snmptrapd, maybe use: org.macports.net-snmp/org.macports.net-snmp.snmpd.plist might be than: org.macports.net-snmp/org.macports.net-snmp.plist because we might need to have: org.macports.net-snmp/org.macports.net-snmp.snmptrapd.plist for snmptrapd as well. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43009#comment:3> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#43009: [update] net-snmp 5.7.2.1 + improvements ------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: ryandesign@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: net-snmp | ------------------------+-------------------------- Changes (by macsforever2000@…): * cc: ryandesign@… (removed) * owner: macports-tickets@… => ryandesign@… -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43009#comment:5> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#43009: [update] net-snmp 5.7.2.1 + improvements ------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: ryandesign@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: net-snmp | ------------------------+-------------------------- Comment (by jul_bsd@…): A strange thing, as I did uninstall/reinstall for the previous patch, this time I got cpu polling working. I have a cacti installed and before, nothing was output by the cpu usage graph and now, I got data. maybe there is something which is not consistent for every installation... -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43009#comment:7> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#43009: [update] net-snmp 5.7.2.1 + improvements ------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: ryandesign@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: net-snmp | ------------------------+-------------------------- Comment (by jul_bsd@…): No problem. I choose to put sane/secure default on installation to avoid exposing unnecessary stuff. After, it depends a lot on what is the user input on snmpconf As also an OpenBSD user, I think it's better if system/package can by default offer secure/sane default and it's up to user to adjust is need but if he does not, he shouldn't be to threatened. Maybe, we can reinforce the notes with text like "To open snmpd, just edit /path/to/plist and remove 127.0.0.1. You are advise to use snmp V3 for authentication and read-only configuration unless necessary eg $ snmpwalk -v3 -On -u <user> -l AuthPriv -a SHA -A <auth_password> -X <encryption_password> <HOST_IP> system " -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43009#comment:9> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#43009: [update] net-snmp 5.7.2.1 + improvements ------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: ryandesign@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: net-snmp | ------------------------+-------------------------- Comment (by ryandesign@…): Thanks for the patch. I see you updated to the proper 5.7.2.1 tarball. I had not done so before because the tarball had been [https://sourceforge.net/p/net- snmp/bugs/2526/ packaged incorrectly], but I see they re-packaged the tarball correctly on 2014-03-10 without mentioning that in the ticket. Your patch re-enables parallel building, but nothing has changed in the code that would have solved the [https://sourceforge.net/p/net- snmp/bugs/2540/ parallel building problem] so I don't want to make that change. In the notes you added to the port, you suggest the user can edit the launchd plist. We don't want to recommend users to edit files installed by the port, because those changes will be lost the next time the port is upgraded. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43009#comment:11> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X