Hello,

As I said two weeks ago, I have had memory leaks when calling specific routines 
from wireshark. I have been silent the days after, I had no time to feed the 
thread. My project (and my job) is now finished, I come back to continue the 
topic.
So, this problem is solved, I want to thank everyone who helped me. As said Guy 
Harris, I didn't called cleanup functions the right way. Once fixed, I got a 
really stable wrapping between my program and libwireshark. As surprising as 
this could be, this method (calling directly call_dissector_only) permitted me 
to get advanced features as expert messages.

I have understood Guy's considerations about my bad use of wireshark. 
Unfortunately, I couldn't refactor the whole wrapping few days before the 
project delivery. However, I'd like some details about Guy's proponal. 
Considering that I passed only the application layer part of the packet, should 
I create a fake frame type with no layer 2, 3, nor 4 headers ?

Moreover, my current use of libwireshark permits to my app to link to a 1.2 
version of Wireshark without the need of modifying it. This is a very important 
property for its use in an external program. We should document a reliable and 
clean way to do this.

This topic is linked with the "independent epan" debate. During this project, I 
realized that there were some limitations for making an independent dissecting 
library. I plan to compare with the latest version (I have built my project on 
the 1.2). However, my thinking is that there is a way to take off the 
dissectors from wireshark, giving its power to a lot of applications.

I know that this is not the priority for the project, but can the team accept 
to organize a work group on this subject ? Is the team interested in that some 
members study this point ? I would be glad to share my uncommon but successful 
experience.

Best regards

PS : @Eloy, as every french guy, I place my last name before my first name (we 
have strange habits :D), so my first name is Emmanuel. You had one in two 
chances. ;)

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to