Launchpad has imported 16 comments from the remote bug at
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=580.

If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment
will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about
Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at
https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-09T12:23:44+00:00 Gtamisier wrote:

Build information:
Version 0.10.13 (C) 1998-2005 Gerald Combs <[email protected]>

Compiled with GTK+ 2.4.14, with GLib 2.4.7, with WinPcap (version unknown),
with libz 1.2.3, with libpcre 6.3, with Net-SNMP 5.2.1.2, with ADNS.

Running with WinPcap version 3.1 (packet.dll version 3, 1, 0, 27), based
on libpcap version 0.9[.x] on Windows XP Service Pack 2, build 2600.

Ethereal is Open Source Software released under the GNU General Public
License.

Check the man page and http://www.ethereal.com for more information.
--

I have the error message : << An error occured while reading from the 
file "C:\Sample.trace": Arg list too long. >> when doing the following action :

I open a very large trace file (2 GB) with a filter, then save the result to a 
new trace file. Before the end, Ethereal stops writing the resulting trace to 
the disk, with the error message.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/0

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-09T12:25:38+00:00 Gtamisier wrote:

Created attachment 154
Error message

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/1

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-26T04:31:49+00:00 ulfl wrote:

This may be a misleading error message (unsure, but doesn't seem right).

Is this simply because your hard disk is full (or your qouta is reached)?
Did you changed the file type before in the save dialog? (probably not, just 
asking)

Any other ideas what might have caused this?

I've tried to reproduce this problem, but didn't had any luck. I was only
getting the expected error messages "... there is no space left ...".

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/2

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-27T06:02:28+00:00 Guy Harris wrote:

Googling for "E2BIG", which is probably the errno value corresponding to "Arg 
list too long", on 
msdn.microsoft.com, revealed only some exec and spawn calls, i.e. calls where 
E2BIG is appropriate (it's 
only *supposed* to be returned for argument lists to a new executable image 
being too large).

Perhaps there's a code path where errno isn't getting set but we're detecting 
an error, and errno was 
previously set to E2BIG by some other call (not necessarily a system call).

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/3

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-27T07:49:10+00:00 Gtamisier wrote:

No, my hard drive is not full, there is a lot of free space. Quotas are not 
enabled.

I have not changed the file type before in the save dialog.

The problem arises when the resulting trace file is very large. I always have 
this problem when the trace file is greater than almost 2,5 Gb.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/4

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-27T15:14:13+00:00 Guy Harris wrote:

Greater than almost 2 1/2 GB, or greater than 2 147 483 647 GB?  2 1/2 GB is an 
unusual number, but 2 
147 483 647 GB is 2^31-1 GB - I'd expect that if file-size problems showed up, 
they'd show up in files > 
2^31-1 GB or 2^32-1 GB.

(If it's 2^31-1 GB, somebody at Microsoft needs to be taught the difference, in 
UN*Xland, between E2BIG 
and EFBIG, which would be the *appropriate* error for a file too large for a 
particular API, if you're using 
UN*X errnos for errors in that API.)

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/5

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-11-28T15:05:32+00:00 Gtamisier wrote:

You are very likely right. I said 2,5 Gb, because all my trace files were more 
than this size. It is not necessarily the limit.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/6

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-03-11T12:02:16+00:00 ulfl wrote:

You can handle files of that size in general and don't use a file system which
can't handle files of that size - don't remember correct, but FAT32 can't handle
files larger than 2GB (or was it 4GB) or some old samba versions.

Sounds there is a value or function used not capable handling more than 2GB
files,  using a simple int which can't hold more than these 2GB. This will be
hard to find in the code :-(

Just for the record, are you using libpcap files or a different file
format?

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/7

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-03-11T13:12:46+00:00 Gtamisier wrote:

The file size limit of FAT32 is 4 Gb, not 2 Gb. Nevertheless, I was using an 
NTFS file system, which doesn't have such a limit.

Yes, I was using a libpcap file.


Reply at: 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/8

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-03-11T18:41:06+00:00 Guy Harris wrote:

Ethereal currently uses longs for file offsets; that doesn't work for files 
>2GB on ILP32 platforms such 
as 32-bit UN*Xes and Win32 (or LLP64 platforms such as Win64).

I don't know whether any of the Microsoft file APIs require an application to 
explicitly declare its 
willingness to handle files >2GB; I think the Large File Summit recommendations 
for UN*X might call for 
APIs of that sort, so that apps that think file offsets are 32 bits (e.g., by 
using off_t on systems where 
off_t is 32 bits) get errors rather than, for example, getting file offsets 
truncated to 32 bits by lseek() 
calls.

On Windows, the current versions of the MSVC++ library have _fseeki64() and 
_ftelli64() calls that use 
__int64 values as file offsets; if those are present in the versions of MSVC++ 
we use (we won't be using 
any that impose redistribution restrictions on binaries built with them, as 
Ethereal, being GPLed, can't 
have limits on redistributability imposed), then we could look at using those 
on Win32, and arrange to 
have file offsets be __int64.

On 4.4BSD-derived UN*Xes ({Free,Net,Open,Dragonfly}BSD, Darwin/OS X), off_t is 
64 bits, and fseeko()/
ftello() are available; on those systems, we could look at using fseeko() and 
ftello(), and have file offsets 
be off_t's.

I'm not sure what other UN*Xes use fseeko()/ftello().  ANSI C has 
fsetpos()/fgetpos(), but it makes no 
guarantee that an fpos_t is an arithmetic type, and to avoid constantly 
fetching file positions (because 
they tend to involve system calls), we assume that, after reading N bytes, the 
file position advances by 
N bytes.

Whether adding 64-bit support of that type to Wiretap and the apps using it 
will clear up this 
*particular* problem is unknown.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/9

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-08-27T12:43:02+00:00 ulfl wrote:

slightly change the summary to reflect the problem better

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/10

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-02-11T04:52:53+00:00 ulfl wrote:

Some time ago I've fixed the wireshark code to use 64 bit integer for
all places where a file offset is used, this would - in theory - fix the
problem.

However, we use zlib to read capture files (which uncompresses gzipped
files transparently for us). Unfortunately, zlib only supports
(unsigned?) long as the file offset, which will leave us on 32bit
platforms with the problem described.

So unless we drop gzip support (by not using zlib), or find a way to
circumvent the zlib 32bit offset limitation, we'll stuck with this
problem.

There were some thoughts to replace zlib with our own implementation, as
zlib doesn't work pretty fast with random access either. But I don't
have enough knowledge about this topic to do this myself.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/11

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-28T21:48:53+00:00 Daniel Black wrote:

for searchable gzip see sgzip as part of 
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=100803.
As far as I know the PyFlag guys are still using it.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/12

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-10-03T00:46:24+00:00 Guy Harris wrote:

sgzip's sgzlib.c says

   sgzip files are files based on the gzip compression
   library which are also quickly seekable and therefore may be used
   for applications where seeking is important.

and sgzlib.h says

   The sgzip file format basically relies on breaking the file into
   blocks, each of these blocks is compressed seperately (which
   results in a slight decrease of compression for small blocks). The
   file then stores these blocks in the compressed file. Just before
   each compressed block, an offset is stored to the next block in the
   file.

I.e., it is *NOT* a library that provides random access to gzipped
files, it's a library that defines its own file format, designed to
better support random access than gzip format does.  That might be
useful - although bzip2 format *also* should support random access, and
is, I suspect, more commonly used - but it doesn't provide a way to do
efficient random access to .gz files.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/13

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-10T10:00:57+00:00 Bugzilla-admin-z wrote:

Consolidate the 0.10.x release versions.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/17

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2011-04-10T14:11:29+00:00 Guy Harris wrote:

On the trunk, we're no longer using zlib's I/O routines, and have made
changes that should support large files on Windows (we no longer support
Windows 9x/Me, so we use APIs that are NT-only) as well as on UN*Xes
that include large file support.

Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wireshark/+bug/190233/comments/19

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/190233

Title:
  wireshark does not have large file (> 2GiB) support

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/wireshark/+bug/190233/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to