>What do you propose? There is very little overlap between samba needs and wireshark needs for PIDL. It is probably better to continue running two separate forks of PIDL, one for samba and one for wireshark.
Switching to samba PIDL seems to be a lot of work for miniscule gain. And who will do the work? On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Andrew Bartlett <abart...@samba.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 19:44 -0700, ronnie sahlberg wrote: >> Cool. >> And we contact you when samba-PIDL no longer can generate compileable >> wireshark dissectors? > > Contacting the Samba Team would seem to be the correct approach. > > Given Matthieu was working on generated dissectors only last week, it > does not seem totally unreasonable. > > What do you propose? > > Andrew Bartlett > > -- > Andrew Bartlett > http://samba.org/~abartlet/ > Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org > Samba Developer, Catalyst IT http://catalyst.net.nz > > ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
