Debian Bug report logs - #694622
nut-snmp: Can't connect to UPS [apcpdu] (snmp-ups-apcpdu): No such file or directory

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: sergio <mailbox@sergio.spb.ru>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: nut-snmp

Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:36:28 +0400

Package: nut-snmp
Version: 2.4.3-1.1squeeze2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable


Looks like nut-snmp is totally unusable:

# upsd -DD
Network UPS Tools upsd 2.6.5
   0.000000     fopen /var/run/nut/upsd.pid: No such file or directory
   0.001154     listening on 127.0.0.1 port 3493
   0.001658     listening on ::1 port 3493
   0.002385     Can't connect to UPS [apcpdu] (snmp-ups-apcpdu): No such file or directory

# apt-cache policy nut-snmp
....
connect(6, {sa_family=AF_FILE, path="snmp-ups-apcpdu"}, 110) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
....

ups.conf
[apcpdu]
        driver = snmp-ups
        port = apc
        mibs = apcc
        community = public

Message #10 received at 694622@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>

To: 694622-submitter@bugs.debian.rg

Cc: 694622@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: nut-snmp

Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 14:04:09 +0100

tag 694622 + moreinfo
thanks

Hello,

Could you please try again with the version unstable?

Cheers

Laurent Bigonville

Message #15 received at 694622-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>

To: 694622-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: nut-snmp

Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 14:19:45 +0100

tag 694622 + moreinfo
thanks

Hello,

Could you please try again with the version unstable?

Cheers

Laurent Bigonville

Message #20 received at 694622@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: sergio <mailbox@sergio.spb.ru>

To: 694622@bugs.debian.org, Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>, 694622-quiet@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 694622-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#694622: nut-snmp

Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 18:57:49 +0400

> Could you please try again with the version unstable?

I've specified several version in with "Version:" header, but looks like
they were discarded.

I've tried with 2.4.3-1.1squeeze2, 2.6.4-2.1 (sid) and 2.6.5-1
(experimental)


-- 
sergio.

Message #39 received at 694622@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Michael Stapelberg <stapelberg@debian.org>

To: sergio <mailbox@sergio.spb.ru>

Cc: 694622@bugs.debian.org, Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>, Arnaud Quette <aquette@debian.org>

Subject: Re: nut-snmp

Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 20:28:53 +0100

On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:36:28 +0400
sergio <mailbox@sergio.spb.ru> wrote:
> Looks like nut-snmp is totally unusable:
> 
> # upsd -DD
> Network UPS Tools upsd 2.6.5
>    0.000000     fopen /var/run/nut/upsd.pid: No such file or directory
>    0.001154     listening on 127.0.0.1 port 3493
>    0.001658     listening on ::1 port 3493
>    0.002385     Can't connect to UPS [apcpdu] (snmp-ups-apcpdu): No
> such file or directory
> 
> # apt-cache policy nut-snmp
> ....
> connect(6, {sa_family=AF_FILE, path="snmp-ups-apcpdu"}, 110) = -1
> ENOENT (No such file or directory) ....
I am by no means a NUT expert (or even user), but it seems to me like
upsd not being able to connect to a particular driver process is normal
when that driver process has an issue and therefore did not start up
properly.

> ups.conf
> [apcpdu]
>         driver = snmp-ups
>         port = apc
>         mibs = apcc
>         community = public
Try removing the “mibs = apcc” line.
Also, maybe specify “snmp_version = v1”.

What is the result of running “upsdrvctl start” as root?

-- 
Best regards,
Michael

Message #44 received at 694622@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ivo De Decker <ivo.dedecker@ugent.be>

To: 694622@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: nut-snmp

Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:43:10 +0100

Control: severity -1 normal

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 08:28:53PM +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > ups.conf
> > [apcpdu]
> >         driver = snmp-ups
> >         port = apc
> >         mibs = apcc
> >         community = public
> Try removing the “mibs = apcc” line.
> Also, maybe specify “snmp_version = v1”.

A simple test show that the line 'mibs = apcc' is not accepted by nut, so this
is a configuration problem. This means the bug is certainly not 'grave', so
I'm downgrading it. If someone can confirm that it works with a different
config, this bug can probably be closed.

Cheers,

Ivo

Message #51 received at 694622@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Arnaud Quette <aquette.dev@gmail.com>

To: Ivo De Decker <ivo.dedecker@ugent.be>

Cc: 694622@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#694622: nut-snmp

Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:30:04 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I can confirm that it works elsewhere.
Note that the value 'apc' in port must be resolved as an IP address...

Arno
(sent from my S3... please excuse my brevity)
Le 9 févr. 2013 12:45, "Ivo De Decker" <ivo.dedecker@ugent.be> a écrit :

> Control: severity -1 normal
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 08:28:53PM +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > > ups.conf
> > > [apcpdu]
> > >         driver = snmp-ups
> > >         port = apc
> > >         mibs = apcc
> > >         community = public
> > Try removing the “mibs = apcc” line.
> > Also, maybe specify “snmp_version = v1”.
>
> A simple test show that the line 'mibs = apcc' is not accepted by nut, so
> this
> is a configuration problem. This means the bug is certainly not 'grave', so
> I'm downgrading it. If someone can confirm that it works with a different
> config, this bug can probably be closed.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ivo
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #56 received at 694622-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: sergio <mailbox@sergio.spb.ru>

To: 694622-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: nut-snmp

Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:10:01 +0400

upsd -DD show the same error without mibs argument or with snmp_version.
But /lib/nut/snmp-ups shows that my pdu is unsupported.

-- 
sergio.

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.