Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu: >> Author: igor >> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013 >> New Revision: 12437 >> >> Log: >> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies > > Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please, > tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my > knowledge about dependencies. I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be used via GLib though. -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>> Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
>>> Author: igor
>>> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
>>> New Revision: 12437
>>>
>>> Log:
>>> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
>>
>> Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
>> tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
>> knowledge about dependencies.
>
> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
> used via GLib though.
>
Thanks, Igor,
I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
{{{
$ find -iname \*pcre\*
./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
$ grep -ri pcre
...
Makefile.nmake:rm -r -f pcre-6.4
Makefile.nmake:rm -r -f pcre-7.0
tools/fix-encoding-args.pl: FT_PCRE
AUTHORS:Display filter operator: matches (PCRE syntax)
ocbook/dfilter2xml.pl: 'FT_PCRE', 'Perl Compatible Regular
Expression',
packaging/nsis/uninstall.nsi:Delete "$INSTDIR\pcrepattern.3.txt"
packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires: pcre-devel
rawshark.c:case FT_PCRE:
rawshark.c:return "FT_PCRE";
epan/enterprise-numbers: dan&blipcreative.com
epan/CMakeLists.txt:ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
epan/wslua/wslua_proto.c: ftypes.UINT_BYTES, ftypes.IPv4, ftypes.IPv6,
ftypes.IPXNET, ftypes.FRAMENUM, ftypes.PCRE, ftypes.GUID
epan/wspython/wspy_dissector.py:FT_PCRE,
epan/ftypes/Makefile.in:ftype-none.lo ftype-pcre.lo ftype-string.lo
ftype-time.lo \
epan/ftypes/Makefile.in:ftype-pcre.c\
epan/ftypes/Makefile.in:@AMDEP_TRUE@@am__include@
@am__quote@./$(DEPDIR)/ftype-pcre.Plo@am__quote@
epan/ftypes/ftypes.h: FT_PCRE,/* a compiled Perl-Compatible Regular
Expression object */
epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
dfilter semcheck() would have
epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: regex, /* Compiled
PCRE */
epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
dfilter semcheck() would have
epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: regex, /* Compiled
PCRE */
epan/ftypes/Makefile.common:ftype-pcre.c\
epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
dfilter semcheck() would have
epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: regex, /* Compiled
PCRE */
epan/ftypes/ftypes.c: ftype_register_pcre();
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * $Id: ftype-pcre.c 48424 2013-03-19 19:02:25Z
etxrab $
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Perl-Compatible Regular Expression (PCRE)
internal field type.
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * compilation and studying of a PCRE pattern
in dfilters.
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from a parsed string pattern.
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from an unparsed string
pattern.
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * and we want to store the compiled PCRE RE
object into the value. */
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register_pcre(void)
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:static ftype_t pcre_type = {
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:FT_PCRE,/* ftype */
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:"FT_PCRE", /* name */
epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register(FT_PCRE, &pcre_type);
epan/ftypes/ftypes-int.h:void ftype_register_pcre(void);
epan/proto.c: case FT_PCRE:
epan/proto.c: { FT_PCRE, "FT_PCR" },
epan/proto.c: case FT_PCRE:
epan/proto.c: /* FT_PCRE never appears as a type for a
registered
field. It is
epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c: guint32 u32RPCRes;
epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c: hf_dcom_variant_rpc_res, &u32RPC
...
}}}
After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
doing that, you think?
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Le 23/12/2013 22:05, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
>> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>>> Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
Author: igor
Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
New Revision: 12437
Log:
remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
>>>
>>> Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
>>> tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
>>> knowledge about dependencies.
>>
>> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
>> used via GLib though.
>>
>
> Thanks, Igor,
>
> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>
> {{{
> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
> $ grep -ri pcre
> ...
> }}}
>
> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
> doing that, you think?
>
pcre is a required dep of GLib, which is a required dep of wireshark. I think
that's the reason why Igor removed it.
Cheers
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On 12/23/2013 10:05 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
>> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>>> Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
Author: igor
Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
New Revision: 12437
Log:
remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
>>>
>>> Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
>>> tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
>>> knowledge about dependencies.
>>
>> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
>> used via GLib though.
>>
>
> Thanks, Igor,
>
> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>
> {{{
> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
> $ grep -ri pcre
> ...
> Makefile.nmake:rm -r -f pcre-6.4
> Makefile.nmake:rm -r -f pcre-7.0
> tools/fix-encoding-args.pl: FT_PCRE
> AUTHORS: Display filter operator: matches (PCRE syntax)
> ocbook/dfilter2xml.pl:'FT_PCRE', 'Perl Compatible
> Regular Expression',
> packaging/nsis/uninstall.nsi:Delete "$INSTDIR\pcrepattern.3.txt"
> packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires: pcre-devel
> rawshark.c:case FT_PCRE:
> rawshark.c:return "FT_PCRE";
> epan/enterprise-numbers: dan&blipcreative.com
> epan/CMakeLists.txt: ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
> epan/wslua/wslua_proto.c: ftypes.UINT_BYTES, ftypes.IPv4, ftypes.IPv6,
> ftypes.IPXNET, ftypes.FRAMENUM, ftypes.PCRE, ftypes.GUID
> epan/wspython/wspy_dissector.py:FT_PCRE,
> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in: ftype-none.lo ftype-pcre.lo ftype-string.lo
> ftype-time.lo \
> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in: ftype-pcre.c\
> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in:@AMDEP_TRUE@@am__include@
> @am__quote@./$(DEPDIR)/ftype-pcre.Plo@am__quote@
> epan/ftypes/ftypes.h: FT_PCRE,/* a compiled Perl-Compatible Regular
> Expression object */
> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c:/* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
> dfilter semcheck() would have
> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c:if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c:regex, /* Compiled
> PCRE */
> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
> dfilter semcheck() would have
> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: regex, /* Compiled
> PCRE */
> epan/ftypes/Makefile.common: ftype-pcre.c\
> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
> dfilter semcheck() would have
> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: regex, /* Compiled
> PCRE */
> epan/ftypes/ftypes.c: ftype_register_pcre();
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * $Id: ftype-pcre.c 48424 2013-03-19 19:02:25Z
> etxrab $
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Perl-Compatible Regular Expression (PCRE)
> internal field type.
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * compilation and studying of a PCRE pattern
> in dfilters.
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from a parsed string pattern.
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from an unparsed string
> pattern.
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * and we want to store the compiled PCRE RE
> object into the value. */
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register_pcre(void)
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:static ftype_t pcre_type = {
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:FT_PCRE,/* ftype */
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:"FT_PCRE", /* name */
> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register(FT_PCRE, &pcre_type);
> epan/ftypes/ftypes-int.h:void ftype_register_pcre(void);
> epan/proto.c: case FT_PCRE:
> epan/proto.c: { FT_PCRE, "FT_PCR" },
> epan/proto.c: case FT_PCRE:
> epan/proto.c: /* FT_PCRE never appears as a type for a
> registered
> field. It is
> epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c:guint32 u32RPCRes;
> epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c:
> hf_dcom_variant_rpc_res, &u32RPC
> ...
> }}}
>
> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
> doing that, you think?
>
Yep, the only relevant part is:
packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires: pcre-devel
which suggests that it might have been used in the past.
--
Igor Živković
http://www.slashtime.net/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On 23.12.2013 23:03, Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 23/12/2013 22:05, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
>> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
>>> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
> Author: igor
> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
> New Revision: 12437
>
> Log:
> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
knowledge about dependencies.
>>>
>>> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
>>> used via GLib though.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, Igor,
>>
>> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>>
>> {{{
>> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
>> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
>> $ grep -ri pcre
>> ...
>> }}}
>>
>> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
>> doing that, you think?
>>
> pcre is a required dep of GLib, which is a required dep of wireshark. I think
> that's the reason why Igor removed it.
>
> Cheers
> Pierre
>
PCRE is recommended dep of Glib, and in the past we never used
recommended dependencies in dependency chain, only required ones.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 23-12-2013 19:21, Igor Živković escreveu:
> On 12/23/2013 10:05 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
>>> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
> Author: igor
> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
> New Revision: 12437
>
> Log:
> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
knowledge about dependencies.
>>>
>>> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
>>> used via GLib though.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, Igor,
>>
>> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>>
>> {{{
>> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
>> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
>> $ grep -ri pcre
>> ...
>> Makefile.nmake:rm -r -f pcre-6.4
>> Makefile.nmake:rm -r -f pcre-7.0
>> tools/fix-encoding-args.pl: FT_PCRE
>> AUTHORS: Display filter operator: matches (PCRE syntax)
>> ocbook/dfilter2xml.pl: 'FT_PCRE', 'Perl Compatible
>> Regular Expression',
>> packaging/nsis/uninstall.nsi:Delete "$INSTDIR\pcrepattern.3.txt"
>> packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires:pcre-devel
>> rawshark.c:case FT_PCRE:
>> rawshark.c:return "FT_PCRE";
>> epan/enterprise-numbers: dan&blipcreative.com
>> epan/CMakeLists.txt: ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
>> epan/wslua/wslua_proto.c:ftypes.UINT_BYTES, ftypes.IPv4, ftypes.IPv6,
>> ftypes.IPXNET, ftypes.FRAMENUM, ftypes.PCRE, ftypes.GUID
>> epan/wspython/wspy_dissector.py:FT_PCRE,
>> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in: ftype-none.lo ftype-pcre.lo ftype-string.lo
>> ftype-time.lo \
>> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in: ftype-pcre.c\
>> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in:@AMDEP_TRUE@@am__include@
>> @am__quote@./$(DEPDIR)/ftype-pcre.Plo@am__quote@
>> epan/ftypes/ftypes.h:FT_PCRE,/* a compiled Perl-Compatible
>> Regular
>> Expression object */
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
>> dfilter semcheck() would have
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: regex, /* Compiled
>> PCRE */
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
>> dfilter semcheck() would have
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: regex, /* Compiled
>> PCRE */
>> epan/ftypes/Makefile.common: ftype-pcre.c\
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the
>> dfilter semcheck() would have
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) {
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: regex, /* Compiled
>> PCRE */
>> epan/ftypes/ftypes.c:ftype_register_pcre();
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * $Id: ftype-pcre.c 48424 2013-03-19 19:02:25Z
>> etxrab $
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Perl-Compatible Regular Expression (PCRE)
>> internal field type.
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * compilation and studying of a PCRE pattern
>> in dfilters.
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from a parsed string pattern.
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from an unparsed string
>> pattern.
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * and we want to store the compiled PCRE RE
>> object into the value. */
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register_pcre(void)
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:static ftype_t pcre_type = {
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:FT_PCRE,/* ftype */
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:"FT_PCRE", /* name */
>> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register(FT_PCRE, &pcre_type);
>> epan/ftypes/ftypes-int.h:void ftype_register_pcre(void);
>> epan/proto.c:case FT_PCRE:
>> epan/proto.c:{ FT_PCRE, "FT_PCR" },
>> epan/proto.c:case FT_PCRE:
>> epan/proto.c:/* FT_PCRE never appears as a type for
>> a registered
>> field. It is
>> epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c: guint32 u32RPCRes;
>> epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c:
>> hf_dcom_variant_rpc_res, &u32RPC
>> ...
>> }}}
>>
>> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
>> doing that, you think?
>>
>
> Yep, the only relevant part is:
>
> packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires: pcre-devel
>
> which suggests that it might have been used in the past.
>
Thanks, Igor.,
I hope you have seen the rest: there are many more places where it
appears. I put only a small part.
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 23-12-2013 19:03, Pierre Labastie escreveu:
> Le 23/12/2013 22:05, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
>> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
>>> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
> Author: igor
> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
> New Revision: 12437
>
> Log:
> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
knowledge about dependencies.
>>>
>>> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
>>> used via GLib though.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, Igor,
>>
>> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>>
>> {{{
>> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
>> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
>> $ grep -ri pcre
>> ...
>> }}}
>>
>> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
>> doing that, you think?
>>
> pcre is a required dep of GLib, which is a required dep of wireshark. I think
> that's the reason why Igor removed it.
>
Thanks, Pierre,
pcre is recommended, not required by glib, so, you can have glib without
pcre, but still could have pcre (optionally) for wireshark?
That was my reasoning.
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On 12/24/2013 12:52 AM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > > I hope you have seen the rest: there are many more places where it > appears. I put only a small part. According to their subversion repository history, it seems that PCRE was never used on Linux. It was used in Windows 32-bit build only: http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=45035 What is being used though is GRegex, see: https://developer.gnome.org/glib/2.37/glib-Perl-compatible-regular-expressions.html -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 23-12-2013 20:44, Armin K. escreveu:
> On 23.12.2013 23:03, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 23/12/2013 22:05, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
>>> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
>> Author: igor
>> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
>> New Revision: 12437
>>
>> Log:
>> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
>
> Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
> tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
> knowledge about dependencies.
I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
used via GLib though.
>>>
>>> Thanks, Igor,
>>>
>>> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>>>
>>> {{{
>>> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
>>> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
>>> $ grep -ri pcre
>>> ...
>>> }}}
>>>
>>> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
>>> doing that, you think?
>>>
>> pcre is a required dep of GLib, which is a required dep of wireshark. I think
>> that's the reason why Igor removed it.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Pierre
>>
>
> PCRE is recommended dep of Glib, and in the past we never used
> recommended dependencies in dependency chain, only required ones.
>
Thanks, Armin,
And it makes sense: only required can be assumed to be installed,
alternative reasoning to what you infer and to what I have written in a
previous post, agreeing with what you wrote above.
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 23-12-2013 22:30, Igor Živković escreveu: > On 12/24/2013 12:52 AM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> >> I hope you have seen the rest: there are many more places where it >> appears. I put only a small part. > > According to their subversion repository history, it seems that PCRE was > never used on Linux. It was used in Windows 32-bit build only: > > http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=45035 > > What is being used though is GRegex, see: > https://developer.gnome.org/glib/2.37/glib-Perl-compatible-regular-expressions.html > Thanks again, Igor, I am convinced by you, now. Thanks for your time to explain to me. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Le 24/12/2013 03:29, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit : > Em 23-12-2013 22:30, Igor Živković escreveu: >> On 12/24/2013 12:52 AM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >>> >>> I hope you have seen the rest: there are many more places where it >>> appears. I put only a small part. >> >> According to their subversion repository history, it seems that PCRE was >> never used on Linux. It was used in Windows 32-bit build only: >> >> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=45035 >> >> What is being used though is GRegex, see: >> https://developer.gnome.org/glib/2.37/glib-Perl-compatible-regular-expressions.html >> > > Thanks again, Igor, > > I am convinced by you, now. Thanks for your time to explain to me. > Does it mean that the wording should be: 'Required : GLib (with PCRE extension, to build the tty-mode front-end only)'? Pierre -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Le 24/12/2013 00:44, Armin K. a écrit :
> On 23.12.2013 23:03, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 23/12/2013 22:05, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
>>> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu:
On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> Em 23-12-2013 12:14, i...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org escreveu:
>> Author: igor
>> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013
>> New Revision: 12437
>>
>> Log:
>> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies
>
> Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please,
> tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my
> knowledge about dependencies.
I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be
used via GLib though.
>>>
>>> Thanks, Igor,
>>>
>>> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did:
>>>
>>> {{{
>>> $ find -iname \*pcre\*
>>> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c
>>> $ grep -ri pcre
>>> ...
>>> }}}
>>>
>>> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong,
>>> doing that, you think?
>>>
>> pcre is a required dep of GLib, which is a required dep of wireshark. I think
>> that's the reason why Igor removed it.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Pierre
>>
>
> PCRE is recommended dep of Glib, and in the past we never used
> recommended dependencies in dependency chain, only required ones.
>
Err,
I sware I saw it was required. I should buy new glasses. Sorry.
I agree about the dependency chain.
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On 12/24/2013 09:52 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote: > Le 24/12/2013 03:29, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit : >> Em 23-12-2013 22:30, Igor Živković escreveu: >>> On 12/24/2013 12:52 AM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I hope you have seen the rest: there are many more places where it appears. I put only a small part. >>> >>> According to their subversion repository history, it seems that PCRE was >>> never used on Linux. It was used in Windows 32-bit build only: >>> >>> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=45035 >>> >>> What is being used though is GRegex, see: >>> https://developer.gnome.org/glib/2.37/glib-Perl-compatible-regular-expressions.html >>> >> >> Thanks again, Igor, >> >> I am convinced by you, now. Thanks for your time to explain to me. >> > Does it mean that the wording should be: > 'Required : GLib (with PCRE extension, to build the tty-mode front-end only)'? No, GLib requires PCRE. The only choice with GLib is whether bundled or system-installed version will be used. -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 24-12-2013 07:09, Igor Živković escreveu:
> On 12/24/2013 09:52 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 24/12/2013 03:29, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
>>> Em 23-12-2013 22:30, Igor Živković escreveu:
According to their subversion repository history, it seems that PCRE was
never used on Linux. It was used in Windows 32-bit build only:
http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=45035
What is being used though is GRegex, see:
https://developer.gnome.org/glib/2.37/glib-Perl-compatible-regular-expressions.html
>>> I am convinced by you, now. Thanks for your time to explain to me.
>>>
>> Does it mean that the wording should be:
>> 'Required : GLib (with PCRE extension, to build the tty-mode front-end
>> only)'?
>
> No, GLib requires PCRE. The only choice with GLib is whether bundled or
> system-installed version will be used.
This is something important I did not know, thanks.
Before your post and due to Pierre's reply, I decided to do a last
investigation. Not sure if it concludes pcre should or not be
"Optional". All applications installed by wireshark-1.10.5 are linked to
pcre directly. No idea of what would happen if glib were installed with
bundled pcre:
{{{
{
for i in /usr/bin/capinfos /usr/bin/dftest /usr/bin/dumpcap
/usr/bin/editcap \
/usr/bin/mergecap /usr/bin/randpkt /usr/bin/rawshark \
/usr/bin/reordercap /usr/bin/text2pcap /usr/bin/tshark \
/usr/bin/wireshark
do echo $i
ldd $i | grep -i pcre
done; unset i
} 2>&1 | tee
~/sshfs/blfs/wireshark-1.10.5-dependencey-on-pcre-2013.12.24.log
/usr/bin/capinfos
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb7295000)
/usr/bin/dftest
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb46b7000)
/usr/bin/dumpcap
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb73c)
/usr/bin/editcap
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb726b000)
/usr/bin/mergecap
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb7277000)
/usr/bin/randpkt
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb7255000)
/usr/bin/rawshark
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb45e)
/usr/bin/reordercap
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb72bf000)
/usr/bin/text2pcap
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb73cc000)
/usr/bin/tshark
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb4588000)
/usr/bin/wireshark
libpcre.so.1 => /lib/libpcre.so.1 (0xb3e78000)
}}}
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On 12/24/2013 12:45 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > > Before your post and due to Pierre's reply, I decided to do a last > investigation. Not sure if it concludes pcre should or not be > "Optional". All applications installed by wireshark-1.10.5 are linked to > pcre directly. Not really. You're seeing libpcre.so in ldd output because libglib-2.0.so links to it. A better tool for such purposes is, for example, scanelf from pax-utils: $ scanelf -BF "%f: %n" capinfos dftest dumpcap editcap mergecap randpkt rawshark reordercap text2pcap tshark wireshark capinfos: libwiretap.so.3,libwsutil.so.3,libgmodule-2.0.so.0,libglib-2.0.so.0,libgcrypt.so.11,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 dftest: libwsutil.so.3,libwireshark.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 dumpcap: libwsutil.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpcap.so.1,libcap.so.2,libz.so.1,libnl-genl-3.so.200,libnl-3.so.200,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 editcap: libwiretap.so.3,libwsutil.so.3,libgmodule-2.0.so.0,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 mergecap: libwiretap.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 randpkt: libwiretap.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 rawshark: libwiretap.so.3,libwireshark.so.3,libwsutil.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpcap.so.1,libz.so.1,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 reordercap: libwiretap.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 text2pcap: libglib-2.0.so.0,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 tshark: libwiretap.so.3,libwireshark.so.3,libwsutil.so.3,libglib-2.0.so.0,libm.so.6,libpcap.so.1,libz.so.1,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 wireshark: libwiretap.so.3,libwireshark.so.3,libwsutil.so.3,libpcap.so.1,libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0,libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0,libpangocairo-1.0.so.0,libcairo.so.2,libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0,libpango-1.0.so.0,libgobject-2.0.so.0,libgmodule-2.0.so.0,libglib-2.0.so.0,libm.so.6,libz.so.1,libnl-route-3.so.200,libnl-genl-3.so.200,libnl-3.so.200,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
One more thing, if PCRE was used directly you would find #include somewhere in the source code. I hope that helps, Fernando. -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 24-12-2013 10:35, Igor Živković escreveu: > One more thing, if PCRE was used directly you would find > > #include > > somewhere in the source code. I hope that helps, Fernando. > All discussion in this topic was very helpful. Each time I discuss about dependencies, I get a little better at it, hopefully one day I will not miss any, anymore. The other post, I will have to study, to use in the future. Again, thank you for your patience. For you and for everybody of B/LFS, users, devs, et al, I hope you have a good time in these end-of-year festivities (for those who these matter). -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 24-12-2013 11:54, Fernando de Oliveira escreveu: > for those who ... I believe this should be "those for whom ... -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 02:32:08PM +0100, Igor Živković wrote: > On 12/24/2013 12:45 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > > > > Before your post and due to Pierre's reply, I decided to do a last > > investigation. Not sure if it concludes pcre should or not be > > "Optional". All applications installed by wireshark-1.10.5 are linked to > > pcre directly. > > Not really. You're seeing libpcre.so in ldd output because > libglib-2.0.so links to it. > > A better tool for such purposes is, for example, scanelf from pax-utils: > I haven't come across pax-utils before. Added to my "to look at" list. The thread has been educational - thanks. Seasonal felicitations to you all. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > Em 24-12-2013 10:35, Igor Živković escreveu: >> One more thing, if PCRE was used directly you would find >> >> #include >> >> somewhere in the source code. I hope that helps, Fernando. >> > > All discussion in this topic was very helpful. Each time I discuss about > dependencies, I get a little better at it, hopefully one day I will not > miss any, anymore. The other post, I will have to study, to use in the > future. Packages keep changing. We all miss some things. That's why we do this together. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] remove pcre from wireshark dependencies [Was: ... r12437 ]
Em 24-12-2013 10:32, Igor Živković escreveu: > On 12/24/2013 12:45 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> >> Before your post and due to Pierre's reply, I decided to do a last >> investigation. Not sure if it concludes pcre should or not be >> "Optional". All applications installed by wireshark-1.10.5 are linked to >> pcre directly. > > Not really. You're seeing libpcre.so in ldd output because > libglib-2.0.so links to it. > > A better tool for such purposes is, for example, scanelf from pax-utils: > > $ scanelf -BF "%f: %n" capinfos dftest dumpcap editcap mergecap randpkt > rawshark reordercap text2pcap tshark wireshark > > capinfos: > libwiretap.so.3,libwsutil.so.3,libgmodule-2.0.so.0,libglib-2.0.so.0,libgcrypt.so.11,libpthread.so.0,libc.so.6 ... This scanelf is very good, thanks. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
