From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Aug 31 1: 7: 3 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE91E37B400 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 01:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from itesec.hsc.fr (itesec.hsc.fr [192.70.106.33]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E2F443E42 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 01:05:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yb@sainte-barbe.org) Received: from taz.hsc.fr (ogoun.hsc.fr [192.70.106.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client CN "taz.hsc.fr", Issuer "HSC CA" (verified OK)) by itesec.hsc.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB6D120FAF for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 10:05:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by taz.hsc.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 884705EB; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 10:05:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 10:05:00 +0200 From: Yann Berthier To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: snmp port Message-ID: <20020831080500.GA519@hsc.fr> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20020830205359.GA452@hsc.fr> <200208302333.32966.mdouhan@fruitsalad.org> <1030747329.8123.17.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1030747329.8123.17.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> X-Organization: Herve Schauer Consultants X-Web: http://www.hsc.fr/ X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 17:33, Matt Douhan wrote: > > > > > > 1. installation of /usr/local/etc/rc.d/snmpd.sh.sample only and let > > > the users needing an snmpd agent to have to know how to launch the > > > snmpd daemon. See 3 > > > 2. divide the port in a client part and a server one. This means more > > > work for the maintainer > > > 3. bind the snmpd daemon on the loopback interface only, and let the > > > ones who need an agent to configure it regarding their needs. After > > > all if they don't know how to do that one can suppose they have > > > nothing to do with an snmpd daemon no ? :) > > > > > > I have no preference, and I am definitly not the maintainer of this > > > port, but I would like to know what other people think about this > > > minor issue. > > > > > > > I would definatly expect the SNMPD not some client thing, when installing SNMP > > I am lookinf fo the dameon to run on the box so that I can gather info from > > it from our NM tools. > > Not always. I work in network management, and it is very helpful to > have snmp* utilities installed on my laptop along with ethereal linked > to net-snmp when I go to customers' sites. I don't need to run snmpd or > snmptrapd. However, on my servers at work, I need both. 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 ? regard, - yann To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message