On Feb 7, 2014, at 8:04 PM, Guy Harris <g...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > There's a LuaFileSystem package: > > http://keplerproject.github.io/luafilesystem/ > > that presumably uses standard UN*X calls on UN*Xes and appropriate Windows > calls on Windows. > > We also have our own wrappers in the wsutil library for some file system > operations. > > Should we either bundle the LuaFileSystem stuff, at least on platforms where > we bundle Lua with Wireshark rather than relying on the OS to have it as a > package (I guess the packager could make the appropriate Wireshark package > depend on the LuaFileSystem package, if one exists), or do our own Lua > extensions using the wsutil routines?
LFS is kinda heavy for our needs I think. Fwiw, there’s already a wslua 'Dir' class available via wslua_util.c, though it only provides directory filename iteration. It just maps to glib’s GDir. > The latter may handle non-ASCII pathnames better on Windows - a quick look at > the LuaFileSystem seems not to indicate that it does any UTF-8-to-UTF-16 > mapping, it just calls _mkdir(), but we map UTF-8 to UTF-16 and call > _wmkdir(). In fairness to LFS, Lua itself doesn’t really handle unicode very well. > It also matches what we do in C/C++ code in Wireshark. Yeah, that’s probably the safest route. -hadriel ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
