October 2005 - Libsmi - lists.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de

libsmi reporting parse error, expecting '$'
by Juergen Schoenwaelder 21 Mar '07

21 Mar '07

Folks, I was getting this error IF-MIB:1: parse error, expecting `$' on several differnt platforms and it finally turned out to be an issue with bison/flex. I do not know the details, but I do know that the combination bison 1.875d and flex 2.5.31 does not work while the combination bison 2.1 and flex 2.5.4 seems to be fine. So if someone runs into similar trouble, make sure you upgrade your build tools... /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

2 3

Failing build from subversion repository
by Keith Dart 13 Dec '05

13 Dec '05

I obtained a subversion copy of libsmi, and try to build it (on two machines), I get the following: gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -g -O2 -MT parser-smi.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/parser-smi.Tpo -c parser-smi.c -o parser-smi.o >/dev/null 2>&1 make[2]: *** No rule to make target `parser-smi.tab.h', needed by `scanner-smi.c'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/u01/home/kdart/src/libsmi/trunk/lib' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/u01/home/kdart/src/libsmi/trunk' make: *** [all] Error 2 But I have flex and bison: 403 !$ bison --version bison (GNU Bison) 1.875 404 $ flex --version flex version 2.5.4 It looks like the Makefile does not include a rule for this, after all. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Keith Dart <kdart(a)kdart.com> public key: ID: F3D288E4 =====================================================================

2 1

Help regarding C64 Textual Conventiond defined in "Understanding SNMP MIBs - Perkins"
by Kurapati M-G19456 24 Oct '05

24 Oct '05

Hi all, I need your help in understanding the Counter64 representation as mentioned in "Understanding SNMP MIBs by DAVID PERKINS, page 51". The book quotes an example the BER serialization of value 56782 of type COUNTER 64 is '9f760300ddce'h. In the above example, value 9f76 is the value of the tag for Counter 64. 03 is the length of the value, and 00ddce is the hexadecimal representation of 56782. My question are 1. why is the length field is represented as 03 i.e. one byte, instead of 0003 (2 bytes is reserved for length in Opaque)? 2. To represent value of 56782 in hexadecimal it is enough if we represent by 'ddce'h. Why is it represented as '00ddce'h? Which is taking 3 bytes in length? 3. Can we use the following tag values for other 64bit data types? Counter64 9f76, Signed64 9f7A, Unsigned64 9f7B. Your clarifications towards understanding this C64 textual convention and data value representation in the Opaque stream will be greatly appreciated. Thanks Mahesh

1 0