Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 09:52:33 +0200 From: Yann Berthier <yb@sainte-barbe.org> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: snmp port Message-ID: <20020903075233.GR436@hsc.fr> In-Reply-To: <7mznuzhf0a.wl@black.imgsrc.co.jp> References: <20020830205359.GA452@hsc.fr> <200208302333.32966.mdouhan@fruitsalad.org> <1030747329.8123.17.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20020831080500.GA519@hsc.fr> <7mznuzhf0a.wl@black.imgsrc.co.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 03 Sep 2002, Jun Kuriyama wrote: > At Sat, 31 Aug 2002 08:07:32 +0000 (UTC), > Yann Berthier wrote: > > Indeed, I am in the same situation, I _do_ use snmpd on a number of > > boxes. The point is, I'm not sure the average user who want to play > > with snmpwalk is conscious that indeed he will have a listening snmpd > > on next reboot. The policy for the installation of the base system is > > to be pretty closed by default, I see no reasons to have ports > > differing on that matter. > > > > > I second changing the startup script to snmpd.sh.sample, and let users > > > decide if they want to enable it. > > > > Thanks for your input, what does the port maintainer think ? > > I'm planning to modify snmpd.sh to read /etc/rc.conf. If you want to > use snmpd, you will need to set net_snmpd_enable="YES" in > /etc/rc.conf. Ok this is another possibility. Is there precedences of rc.conf being used to control a port, though ? Anyway, thanks, - yann -- Yann.Berthier@hsc.fr -*- HSC -*- http://www.hsc.fr/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020903075233.GR436>