[Wireshark-dev] COPY_ADDRESS and g_malloc()

Hi, does not it make sence to change g_malloc() in COPY_ADDRESS to se_alloc() ? It seems that it is not freed in most cases of usage. Do wee need anywhere longer lifetime then se_alloc() has? Tomas ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list

[Wireshark-dev] [PATCH] DCCP: variable-length checksums

Hi, please find attached a patch file against svn rev. 19883. This is Gerrit Renker code which: * makes checksum computation dependent upon the header CsCov field (cf. RFC 4340, 5.1) * removes the case where checksums are zero (unlike UDP/packet-udp, from which the

[Wireshark-dev] [patch] TIPC - show src/dst for Neighbour Discovery Packets

Hi, could anybody please apply that to epan/dissectors/packet-tipc.c and check it in? This patch changes the name of Link Configuration Packets to Neighbour Discovery - as preferred by the creator of TIPC - and shows the TIPC src/dst in the columns instead of the MAC address for those packages.

Re: [Wireshark-dev] COPY_ADDRESS and g_malloc()

may be we should have EP_COPY_ADDRESS, SE_COPY_ADDRESS and PE_COPY_ADDRESS instead. On 11/13/06, Kukosa, Tomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, does not it make sence to change g_malloc() in COPY_ADDRESS to se_alloc() ? It seems that it is not freed in most cases of usage. Do wee need

[Wireshark-dev] What are nmake commands required to build dissector

I have cut an pasted the Windows Makefile.nmake below from the developer guide. My dissector is the sample one from the guide, and I have stuck with the name foo. I think I have followed the edits in README.plugins correctly, but I am not familiar with nmake and I get lost at section 4. My

Re: [Wireshark-dev] This application has failed to start because wiretap-0.3.dll was not found

Yes! Running from wireshark-gtk2 means the dll is found. I have managed build the system and capture data. Thanks RT -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireshark-dev- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ulf Lamping Sent: 12 November 2006 16:59 To: Developer support list

Re: [Wireshark-dev] This application has failed to start because wiretap-0.3.dll was not found

Hi, Congrats! Thanx, Jaap On Mon, 13 Nov 2006, Robert Trybis wrote: Yes! Running from wireshark-gtk2 means the dll is found. I have managed build the system and capture data. Thanks RT ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org

[Wireshark-dev] Wireshark / Tshark 0.99.4 crashes with Segmentation fault where p rev. version worked

Title: Nachricht Hello Wireshark Community, I have discovered a problem with causes Wireshark and Tshark to crash with a segmentation fault error. This problem is new to the version 0.99.4. I have a tcpdumb which holds mostly GTP data whichI would like to open or filter with Wireshark or

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Wireshark / Tshark 0.99.4 crashes with Segmentation fault where p rev. version worked

Hi, 110MB is certainly a big trace. I guess you have a rough idea at which part of the capture file the crash occurs. Can your 'editcap' that piece out of the big capture and check if the problem remains? You could also cut it in 5 x 22MB pieces, which should easily load into Wireshark one by

Re: [Wireshark-dev] creating a NBAP dissector with a different versionof the NBAP ASN.1 definition - asn2wrs questions

Hi Anders, thanks for the input. Sadly it'd need far too much effort to have all of that implemented and regularly updated - especially due to my lack of knowledge regarding ASN.1 and nbap. Since we're getting regularly updated precompiled :-( libraries here anyway that transform the nbap asn1

Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Patch] Fix for bug #1163: Dissector bug.ISO8073COTP protocol.

Checked in. BR Anders -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Stephen Fisher Skickat: den 10 november 2006 23:42 Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Developer support list for Wireshark Ämne: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Patch] Fix for bug #1163: Dissector

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Bug #1205 fix

Done in revision 19888. BR Anders -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Stephen Fisher Skickat: den 13 november 2006 23:04 Till: wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Ämne: [Wireshark-dev] Bug #1205 fix Could someone apply the first part of the patch on

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Continuing support for ucd-snmp?

On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:23:29AM +0100, Joerg Mayer wrote: usb-nsmp has been superceeded by net-snmp for quite a while now. ucd-snmp is unmaintained. Is there any good reason why we should continue to support both, ucd-snmp and net-snmp? I see no reason to continue supporting ucd-snmp as

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Continuing support for ucd-snmp?

Hi, If all our supported platforms agree on this we can vote for net-snmp only. Thanx, Jaap On Mon, 13 Nov 2006, Stephen Fisher wrote: On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:23:29AM +0100, Joerg Mayer wrote: usb-nsmp has been superceeded by net-snmp for quite a while now. ucd-snmp is unmaintained.