Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:29:30 -0800 From: paul beard <paulbeard@mac.com> To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: POLA violation?: snmp renumbering stuff Message-ID: <089CEF13-1E26-11D8-B52A-000A95BBCCF8@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20031124020006.GI2146@dan.emsphone.com> References: <8FF2C6A7-1DFB-11D8-B52A-000A95BBCCF8@mac.com> <20031124020006.GI2146@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 23, 2003, at 6:00 PM, Dan Nelson wrote: > I don't think snmp tables have any defined order. I don't even know if > the index for a particular resource is guaranteed to be stable across > filesystem dismount/remounts. Something like this should work: > My issue was that they shouldn't change once defined: otherwise, how can you reliably use something if it adopts different behavior with each new release/build? After all, we're not talking about Windows here . . . . ;-) It would be useful if / were always 1, for example. It looks like, with the inclusion of RAM and swap in the table, / might be 3. -- Paul Beard <paulbeard.no-ip.org/movabletype/> paulbeard [at] mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?089CEF13-1E26-11D8-B52A-000A95BBCCF8>