Luis EG Ontanon wrote: > On 8/24/07, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Richard van der Hoff wrote: >>> Ok. I still don't have an oid_to_subid_buf, though :( >> Right. For now, I have cut and pasted the old oid_to_subid_buf into >> oid_resolv.c. This at least has made things build again. > > there is oid_encoded2subid() in oids.c which does the same, I'll > change the users of that to use the old one.
Ah right. Thanks. >> LEGO, can I suggest that in future you don't even commit the templates >> for autogenerated files, such that we don't get into this situation. > > I needed to have a reference, I got that code working and before a > further iteration I wanted to be able to keep track of what I did. I > know the right way would have being to fork a new branch keep working > on that and later on merge it to the trunk. But keeping the generated > and the oids.[ch] files out of the way looked a usable shortcut. I > could have disabled the copy_files target and the problem would not > had happened... Well, it would, because Joerg changed other bits of code that the asn dissectors depended on, so he *had* to regenerate the asn dissectors. > But to be sincere I do not think it's was such a > harmful thing, it's not like I wrecked the codebase and made it > unusable, it was just a forced rollout. Well... spending a couple of hours of my morning figuring out why the build broke wasn't ideal - so is the way to avoid this by not checking in the templates, or by being ultracareful when regenerating the asn dissectors? >> Incidentally, is the right process for generating the asn dissectors to >> run "make" from the asn/* directories and then copy the generated files >> across? It seems kludgy, but I couldn't see a better way. > > (cd asn/snmp && make copy_files) Aha. >> What is the reasoning behind checking in the generated asn dissectors? >> Is this for people without python on their boxes? > No it's because the asn2wrs compiler is not considered to be stable > enough yet to make the generated files targets in the makefiles. I > think Thomas will take the steps to make those files targets whenever > he feels it's time. Ah right, understood. Although - this suggests that regenerating the asn dissectors should indeed be undertaken only with the utmost caution? _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
