Suggesting that the bbc is capable of labeling tests. The hobbit-clients'
data is staying clear.
two.myhost.com does have data and it is [ps] and [msgs:/var/log/messages]
one.myhost.com and three.myhost.com has no data on the server.
hobbitclient.log is full of:
2009-09-09 14:38:44 Failed to get a message, terminating
$bb server.fqdn.com ping #this command works
hobbit-4.2.0
This is running a CentOS release 5.2 (Final) and CentOS release 5 (Final)
respectively - "Red Hat Linux".
One thread on the archives was able to fix it by installing the Debian
package. Obviously I can't do that. The strange part is I executed the
exact same commands across all three - the same ones I put up here
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/System_Monitoring_with_Xymon/Administration_Guide/Compiling_on_CentOS
Perhaps there is a package missing of some sort? Is there a way to get more
detailed logs from the hobbitclient.log?
Josh Luthman
Office: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Direct: XXX-XXX-XXXX
XXXX Wayne St
Suite XXXX
Troy, OH XXXXX
"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth."
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Greg Hubbard <user-435e16ecfd6a@xymon.invalid> wrote:
Then what was this all about? I guess I read it wrong.
*"However on an bbc 1.9i btf (better then free) client it is pushing PROCs
to the server:
#cat ~bbuser/bbc1.9i-btf/etc/bbwarnsetup.cfg:
...
PROCS="bbrun" # (YELLOW) WARN IF NOT RUNNING
PAGEPROC="cron" # (RED) PAGE IF NOT RUNNING
export PROCS PAGEPROC"
• What you might want to do is track down the "raw data" being sent by these
hosts to see if they contain a PROC secion. I think you can get to it on
each host through the
http://<xymon-server>/hobbit-cgi/bb-hostsvc.sh?CLIENT=<client<http://%3Cxymon-server%3E/hobbit-cgi/bb-hostsvc.sh?CLIENT=%3Cclient>>;
link. On Solaris you would look for a [ps] header, then a list of
processes. This will show you that the data is getting pumped over. (For
Linux, etc. there might be something different).
And, if your config fragment is correct, you would not expect any PROC
checks for one or two, just for three, since you only defined them for three
and there are no PROC checks in the DEFAULT section.