<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
That's a good idea, I forgot about that Perl version of bb. Hmm I
wonder if there is anything special that the bb binary does to send
it's data, such that you could just use "netcat" and pipe the client
data to it. Only problem then is his server might not have netcat
either :)<br>
<br>
-Charles<br>
<br>
Larry Barber wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid199afa060606211026l7e7398e2t81a95d931d54a54b@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">The only binary you _really_ need is bb and I think I saw
a Perl version of the BigBrother bb program on deadcat. If you were to
install that you could use cron (assuming these are Unix-like machines)
to run the hobbitclient.sh script every 5 minutes. <br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Larry Barber<br>
<br>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/21/06, <b
class="gmail_sendername">Hubbard, Greg L</b> <<a
href="mailto:greg.hubbard@eds.com">greg.hubbard@eds.com</a>
> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Henrik:<br>
<br>
I heard a rumor that Nagios has an optional client that does not have
to
<br>
be compiled. Don't know if this is true, but it would sure help me out<br>
if there was a "Perl-only" or "Perl+shell" client that I could use on<br>
the one or two systems where I cannot install all the junk needed to
<br>
compile a Hobbit client binary. Binary Perl distributions that just<br>
drop in are usually available... I know there would be a performance<br>
hit, but I would rather have a more expensive-to-run client than no<br>
client.
<br>
<br>
Thoughts?<br>
<br>
GLH<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Henrik Stoerner [mailto:<a href="mailto:henrik@hswn.dk">henrik@hswn.dk</a>]<br>
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:33 AM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:hobbit@hswn.dk">
hobbit@hswn.dk</a><br>
Subject: Re: [hobbit] Hobbit vs Nagios<br>
<br>
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 09:47:47PM -0400, Matthew Davis wrote:<br>
> I tried out nagios and one huge winning factor for Hobbit was<br>
> simplicity. I put quite a bit of time into getting nagios off the
<br>
> ground with little luck. And in the same amount of time, I was
able<br>
> to get nearly all functionality I required out of a monitoring<br>
> program.<br>
<br>
I had a funny experience last week. There was a Linux Users group
<br>
meeting here in Copenhagen, where the subject was "Setting up Nagios".<br>
Since I'm always interested to see what the competitors look like, I<br>
attended. The guy who told about Nagios knew that I am behind Hobbit,
as
<br>
did a couple of the people in the audience. So when the talk about<br>
Nagios was over and there was some spare time left, they asked me if I<br>
could give a quick overview of Hobbit. Which I did, thanks to a wireless<br>
Internet connection they managed to setup quickly.<br>
<br>
After about an hour, someone in the audience asked the Nagios guy "after<br>
hearing about Nagios and Hobbit tonight, why didn't you just install<br>
Hobbit?"
<br>
<br>
I think that tells a lot about how easy it is to setup Hobbit compared<br>
to Nagios.<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>