Problem found: The code was compiled on -stable, which I apparently misread. There's changes in libutil in current that this diff needs.
Pending Joel's results: Anyone else wanting to chime in? On Mon, 2022-01-03 at 15:09 +0100, Joel Carnat wrote: > Hello, > > I have just patched my snmpd from -current ; everything else is > 7.0-stable. I'm not sure what happens but I use the same snmpd.conf and > connects to snmpd from another machine using > > # snmpwalk -v 3 -a SHA -A "changeme" -l authPriv -u telegraf \ > -x AES -X "changeme" server > > But using the patched snmpd, I get the following error: > mib_2 = No Such Object available on this agent at this OID. Using the > 7.0 version, it works perfectly. > > I can send full snmpd logs if you think it's usefull. > > Regards, > Joel C. > > On 1/3/22 13:57, Martijn van Duren wrote: > > On Sun, 2021-11-21 at 14:58 +0100, Martijn van Duren wrote: > > > On Sun, 2021-11-14 at 14:35 +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > > On 2021/11/14 11:49, Martijn van Duren wrote: > > > > > sthen@ found an issue when using this diff with netsnmp tools. > > > > > > > > > > The problem was that I put the requestID in the msgID, resulting > > > > > in a mismatch upon receiving the reply. The reason that snmp(1) > > > > > works is because msgID and requestID are the same. > > > > > Diff below fixes things. > > > > > > > > This version works for me, and the runtime increase with librenms > > > > fetches and polls (which use a mixture of get/bulkwalk) is acceptable > > > > (10% or so). > > > > > > > Anyone else put this through a test? I want to move forward with this. > > > > > > martijn@ > > > > > 2 month ping. > > So far I only have gotten test results from sthen@. > > Should I just put this in or is someone planning to actually look into > > the code? > > > > martijn@
