I was kind of expecting this change to generate more controversy, so I'll
give it another few days but if nobody objects I'll merge it then.
https://code.wireshark.org/review/2669
I don't currently plan on putting it in 1.12 so that we have a full dev
cycle to work out any subtle implications, bu
Peter Wu writes:
> On Monday 30 June 2014 07:12:56 Evan Huus wrote:
> > The "menagerie" is our collection of capture files that the fuzz-bot uses to
> > test with. It contains a substantial number of files across as many
> > protocols as we have been able to accumulate. However, I am not sure it
(adding back the list, adding Gerald)
On Monday 30 June 2014 09:33:29 Evan Huus wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Peter Wu wrote:
> > On Monday 30 June 2014 07:12:56 Evan Huus wrote:
> > > The "menagerie" is our collection of capture files that the fuzz-bot
> > > uses to
> > > test with.
On Monday 30 June 2014 07:12:56 Evan Huus wrote:
> The "menagerie" is our collection of capture files that the fuzz-bot uses to
> test with. It contains a substantial number of files across as many
> protocols as we have been able to accumulate. However, I am not sure it is
> entirely publicly acce
The "menagerie" is our collection of capture files that the fuzz-bot uses to
test with. It contains a substantial number of files across as many protocols
as we have been able to accumulate. However, I am not sure it is entirely
publicly accessible?
Additionally, it is not indexed. There is a s
Hi,
Is there an accessible list of capture files for each supported
dissector? I would like to make some changes w.r.t. reassembly, but
want to be sure not to introduce regressions. SampleCaptures contains
a list of captures, but these are not complete and are not grouped
per dissector.
What I am
>> Should g2abc541 and related changes
>> be cherry-picked?
>
>
> I don't know, possibly? Michal would probably have a better idea.
Possible, but I think it is not critical for now.
--
Pozdrawiam / Best regards
