On Nov 6, 2013, at 1:59 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=53118
>
> User: mmann
> Date: 2013/11/06 09:59 PM
>
> Log:
> Correctly report segments marked with REASSEMBLE_FLAGS_NO_FRAG_NUMBER. Bug
> 9304 (https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9304)
>
> Instead of incrementing the offset for each new segment by one we add the
> length of the segment so that each segment is correctly shown in the segment
> list.
>
> It proves to be very useful to find which packet (segment) is causing an
> application dissector to go wrong.
>
> From Matthieu Patou
This may have broken some tests:
http://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/builders/Windows-XP-x86/builds/7185/steps/test.sh/logs/stdio
5 Suite: Unit tests
5.1 Step: exntest OK
5.2 Step: oids_test OK
5.3 Step: reassemble_test
Starting test test_simple_fragment_add_seq
Assertion failed at line 256: NULL!=fd_head (0!=0)
"reassemble_test" Failed!
exit status of
C:\buildbot/wireshark/trunk-32/winxpx86/build/wireshark-gtk2/reassemble_test: 1
./testout.txt:Starting test test_simple_fragment_add_seq
./testout.txt:Assertion failed at line 256: NULL!=fd_head (0!=0)
Either the tests are wrong or the change introduced a bug.
___________________________________________________________________________
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
