On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 01:57:12PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On Oct 3, 2013, at 8:04 PM, ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There is very little overlap between samba needs and wireshark needs for
> > PIDL.
> > It is probably better to continue running two separate forks of PIDL,
> > one for samba and one for wireshark.
> >
> > Switching to samba PIDL seems to be a lot of work for miniscule gain.
> > And who will do the work?
>
> Are you referring to forking PIDL, the language, or to forking PIDL, the tool
> that translates PIDL-the-language descriptions into code for
> {Samba,Wireshark,...}?
If I understand it correctly, he is talking about the backend: There are
different backends for Samba3, Samba4 and Wireshark. The Wireshark backend
differs quite a lot from the Samba backends.
pidl/lib/Parse/Pidl/ is the location of the backends.
Ciao
jörg
--
Joerg Mayer <jma...@loplof.de>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
___________________________________________________________________________
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
