Re: [Wireshark-dev] how to include a head file
On Friday 28 March 2014 13:10:09 我想不无聊 wrote: then I add the file to /gtk/main.c file , #include peformance.h //somebody told me not to use ../peformance.h because there is subdir to search Well, I was that somebody and refused to reply on the last private mail because you provided *no* additional details that was requested. peformance pef_test; peformance *peformance_test=pef_test; Please fix this typo, it is performance. PeRformance. in the ./wiretap/libpcap.c file, I want to use struct peformance , #include peformance.h //or #include ../peformance.h,i do not know which one to use peformance_test-index=0; it shows to me one error,the error information is : wiretap/.libs/libwiretap.so: undefined reference to `peformance_test' what is going on and why is that? libwiretap is not linked with the ui, but wireshark is. If you need your symbol in libwiretap, then define performance_test in libwiretap. libwiretap gets linked with wireshark, so this should work fine. Kind regards, Peter ___ 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
[Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
If 5.2 has been out for three years at this point it sounds fine to me. On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
Hi Pavel,
Can you use the revised workflow and submit the change to Gerrit. Any
discussion on the proposed change will take place in the Gerrit Review
process.
Workflow info can be found here:
http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Workflow
On 28 March 2014 15:06, Pavel Karneliuk pavel_karnel...@epam.com wrote:
Hello,
At first, thank you all for Wireshark. It is amazing tool!
I found a defect and register Bug
9936https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9936–
“epan/follow.c - Incorrect comparing a sequence number of TCP fragment
when its value wraps over uint32_t limit”
A capture file and my patch are attached to bug in Bugzilla.
Patch is a one-line fix:
--- a/epan/follow.c
+++ b/epan/follow.c
@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ check_fragments( int idx, tcp_stream_chunk *sc,
guint32 acknowledged ) {
lowest_seq = current-seq;
}
- if( current-seq seq[idx] ) {
+ if( LT_SEQ(current-seq, seq[idx]) ) {
guint32 newseq;
/* this sequence number seems dated, but
check the end to make sure it has no more
It is just a replacement a compare operator to wraps-friendly macro.
Similar to code around (with GT_SEQ usage).
What do you think?
Best Regards,
*Pavel Karneliuk*
Senior Software Engineer
EPAM Systems
Minsk office, Belarus
___
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
___
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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu: +1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal. ___ 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
[Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
Hello,
At first, thank you all for Wireshark. It is amazing tool!
I found a defect and register Bug
9936https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9936 - epan/follow.c
- Incorrect comparing a sequence number of TCP fragment when its value wraps
over uint32_t limit
A capture file and my patch are attached to bug in Bugzilla.
Patch is a one-line fix:
--- a/epan/follow.c
+++ b/epan/follow.c
@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ check_fragments( int idx, tcp_stream_chunk *sc, guint32
acknowledged ) {
lowest_seq = current-seq;
}
- if( current-seq seq[idx] ) {
+ if( LT_SEQ(current-seq, seq[idx]) ) {
guint32 newseq;
/* this sequence number seems dated, but
check the end to make sure it has no more
It is just a replacement a compare operator to wraps-friendly macro. Similar to
code around (with GT_SEQ usage).
What do you think?
Best Regards,
Pavel Karneliuk
Senior Software Engineer
EPAM Systems
Minsk office, Belarus
___
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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
Hi Pascal,
thank you for answer. I saw your commits to follow.c and I hoped for your reply.
450:if( newseq seq[idx] ) {
I think - Yes. It compares sequence numbers.
459: if ( current-data_len new_pos ) {
I am sure, that - No. Because it compares length of data from fragment instead
of sequence numbers.
There are some places in check_fragments() and reassemble_tcp() with a naive
comparison of sequence numbers:
369: if( sequence seq[src_index] ) {
I think, they should be replaced with macros from packet-tcp.h 51-55. At least
to be uniformly.
Best Regards,
Pavel Karneliuk
Senior Software Engineer
From: wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org
[mailto:wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of Pascal Quantin
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 6:14 PM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch
are available on Bugzilla.
2014-03-28 16:06 GMT+01:00 Pavel Karneliuk
pavel_karnel...@epam.commailto:pavel_karnel...@epam.com:
Hello,
At first, thank you all for Wireshark. It is amazing tool!
I found a defect and register Bug
9936https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9936 - epan/follow.c
- Incorrect comparing a sequence number of TCP fragment when its value wraps
over uint32_t limit
A capture file and my patch are attached to bug in Bugzilla.
Patch is a one-line fix:
--- a/epan/follow.c
+++ b/epan/follow.c
@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ check_fragments( int idx, tcp_stream_chunk *sc, guint32
acknowledged ) {
lowest_seq = current-seq;
}
- if( current-seq seq[idx] ) {
+ if( LT_SEQ(current-seq, seq[idx]) ) {
guint32 newseq;
/* this sequence number seems dated, but
check the end to make sure it has no more
It is just a replacement a compare operator to wraps-friendly macro. Similar to
code around (with GT_SEQ usage).
What do you think?
Hi Pavel,
while we are at it, shouldn't the comparison done at lines 450 and 459 be
wrapped in a GT_SEQ macro also?
Regards,
Pascal.
___
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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaBinaries web page suggests to go to http://joedf.users.sourceforge.net/luabuilds/ for a 5.2.3 pre compiled binary but it does not include the header files. I guess I could get them from the source package. Pascal. ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
2014-03-28 16:06 GMT+01:00 Pavel Karneliuk pavel_karnel...@epam.com:
Hello,
At first, thank you all for Wireshark. It is amazing tool!
I found a defect and register Bug
9936https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9936-
epan/follow.c - Incorrect comparing a sequence number of TCP fragment
when its value wraps over uint32_t limit
A capture file and my patch are attached to bug in Bugzilla.
Patch is a one-line fix:
--- a/epan/follow.c
+++ b/epan/follow.c
@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ check_fragments( int idx, tcp_stream_chunk *sc,
guint32 acknowledged ) {
lowest_seq = current-seq;
}
- if( current-seq seq[idx] ) {
+ if( LT_SEQ(current-seq, seq[idx]) ) {
guint32 newseq;
/* this sequence number seems dated, but
check the end to make sure it has no more
It is just a replacement a compare operator to wraps-friendly macro.
Similar to code around (with GT_SEQ usage).
What do you think?
Hi Pavel,
while we are at it, shouldn't the comparison done at lines 450 and 459 be
wrapped in a GT_SEQ macro also?
Regards,
Pascal.
___
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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu: +1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal. ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
Yes, I am going to gerrit.
From: wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org
[mailto:wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of Pascal Quantin
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 6:57 PM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch
are available on Bugzilla.
Le 28 mars 2014 16:52, Pavel Karneliuk
pavel_karnel...@epam.commailto:pavel_karnel...@epam.com a écrit :
Hi Pascal,
thank you for answer. I saw your commits to follow.c and I hoped for your
reply.
450:if( newseq seq[idx] ) {
I think - Yes. It compares sequence numbers.
459: if ( current-data_len new_pos ) {
I am sure, that - No. Because it compares length of data from fragment
instead of sequence numbers.
Doh that's what happens when you reply without looking carefully at the code ;)
There are some places in check_fragments() and reassemble_tcp() with a
naive comparison of sequence numbers:
369: if( sequence seq[src_index] ) {
I think, they should be replaced with macros from packet-tcp.h 51-55. At
least to be uniformly.
As Graham suggested, it would be great if you could submit a patch on gerrit
against master branch. Would it be feasible?
Regards,
Pascal.
___
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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
BTW, to answer your question directly, no I don't think it's a big deal if you only run 5.2.1. The bugs fixed in 5.2.2 were pretty esoteric, and even more so those fixed in 5.2.3. FWIW, I use Lua 5.2.1 on my Mac all the time (because MacPorts hasn't updated their Lua installer to 5.2.3 yet, and I use MacPorts). -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu: +1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal. ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ 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
[Wireshark-dev] Gerrit Diff format
(To: Gerald) Currently the Gerrit diff shows whitespace changes. Previously, when viewing diffs of SVN commits via the web, whitespace changes were not shown. If others agree, is it possible to configure the Gerrit diff to not show whitespace changes ? (Or to provide an option ?) Bill ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
+1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.comwrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ 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 -- Kenjiro NAKAYAMA nakayamakenj...@gmail.com GPG Key fingerprint = ED8F 049D E67A 727D 9A44 8E25 F44B E208 C946 5EB9 ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
+1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ 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 -- Kenjiro NAKAYAMA nakayamakenj...@gmail.com GPG Key fingerprint = ED8F 049D E67A 727D 9A44 8E25 F44B E208 C946 5EB9 ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Defect in reassembling TCP stream. Bug and Patch are available on Bugzilla.
Le 28 mars 2014 16:52, Pavel Karneliuk pavel_karnel...@epam.com a écrit
:
Hi Pascal,
thank you for answer. I saw your commits to follow.c and I hoped for your
reply.
450:if( newseq seq[idx] ) {
I think - Yes. It compares sequence numbers.
459: if ( current-data_len new_pos ) {
I am sure, that - No. Because it compares length of data from fragment
instead of sequence numbers.
Doh that's what happens when you reply without looking carefully at the
code ;)
There are some places in check_fragments() and reassemble_tcp() with a
naive comparison of sequence numbers:
369: if( sequence seq[src_index] ) {
I think, they should be replaced with macros from packet-tcp.h 51-55. At
least to be uniformly.
As Graham suggested, it would be great if you could submit a patch on
gerrit against master branch. Would it be feasible?
Regards,
Pascal.
___
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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). Huh. I figured they were just being built from source. At my day job we just build the whole thing in statically, but we had to use our own anyway because we made some changes to the Lua engine to protect against bad Lua code, and we don't allow people to swap it out as a shared library/dll. http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaBinaries web page suggests to go to http://joedf.users.sourceforge.net/luabuilds/ for a 5.2.3 pre compiled binary but it does not include the header files. I guess I could get them from the source package. Yup. -hadriel ___ 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
[Wireshark-dev] (no subject)
Khemis Haythem Adresse: BoitePostale 101 4118, Mednine GSM : +216 55 69 19 90 E-mail : khemis.hayt...@yahoo.fr Statut : Élèveingénieur Spatialité : Géniedes Communications etdesRéseaux Ecole : Ecole National d'IngénieursdeGabes hello, I was just hoping if anyone could provide me with some good tutorials to write your own dissector in Wireshark and add it as a pluggin to Wireshark. please i m really blocked, i really want someone who tell from where i begin because i don't know from where i begin, i can't understand all the envirement in witch i work, the file .c all changes muste i do, how to commit my changes, there is nothing clear. please answer me i m really blocked Thanks and Regards, haythem ___ 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
Re: [Wireshark-dev] (no subject)
Start here: http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=blob;f=doc/README.dissector https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=blob;f=doc/README.developer -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 8:49 PM, khemis haythem khemis.hayt...@yahoo.fr wrote: Khemis Haythem Adresse : Boite Postale 101 4118, Mednine GSM : +216 55 69 19 90 E-mail : khemis.hayt...@yahoo.fr Statut : Élève ingénieur Spatialité : Génie des Communications et des Réseaux Ecole : Ecole National d'Ingénieurs de Gabes hello, I was just hoping if anyone could provide me with some good tutorials to write your own dissector in Wireshark and add it as a pluggin to Wireshark. please i m really blocked, i really want someone who tell from where i begin because i don't know from where i begin, i can't understand all the envirement in witch i work, the file .c all changes muste i do, how to commit my changes, there is nothing clear. please answer me i m really blocked Thanks and Regards, haythem ___ 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 ___ 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
