Hi,

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Jirka Novak <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Peter,
>
>   first: happy-shark is very good idea. All notes above I would like to
> discuss and then I will try to add my samples with respect to
> conclusions...
>
> > For a basic testing framework, have a look at
> > https://github.com/wireshark/happy-shark
> >
> > To-do: populate the test/ directory with lots of specific samples :-)
>
> This approach looks good to me, I will try to add samples.
> What I'm missing there is idea how to add description for a sample - I
> mean "description" - why sample is there and "specification" - what
> wireshark should do with it.
> Testing with PDML is good idea, but it tests dissectors only. Time to
> time you want to store sample because GUI should do something with it
> (e.g. show it in red).
> 1) Won't be good idea to ask for e.g. <sample>.description.txt and
> <sample>.specification.txt for each sample?
> 2) Won't be good idea to allow skip a sample from automatic testing
> (because it is for GUI demonstration)?
>
For GUI stuff, a idea will be to use Extensive Testing (
http://www.extensivetesting.org/ )
it is on my TODO list but never found time to implement...


>
> > I think that happy-shark (which uses PDML output with a XSL
> > post-processor) does what you want.
>
> I tried to run make in top directory and it failed for first try :-) I
> checked the output and found that something changed in DNS dissector and
> dns.flags.recdesired .. value="1" was in past and now value="FFFFFFFF".
> It is probably about signed/unsigned value - not important now.
> But this issue pointed to me more things:
> 3) There should be easy way how to describe which wireshark version
> processed stored PDML file.
> Probably different outputs should be stored for main branches (2.0, 2.2,
> ...). It is obvious that each version of wireshark will change (improve)
> some outputs. Therefore older release will not be able to process it
> correctly (PDML diff will fail).
> I think that without output version you can't run regression tests
> automatically.
> 4) There should be easy way how to run custom wireshark version without
> modifying Makefile. I have multiple versions for testing. I think
> environment variable solve it.
> 5) There should be easy way how to describe which filter should be used
> for preprocessing PDML. Now only filter.xsl is used.
>
> Maintaining such sample repository would be hard work. But I believe
> that when there will be rules how to add sample and which information
> must be added to it, it will be much easier.
>
> 6) Rules must be written.
> 6) There should be a procedure which check whether repository/new sample
> contains expected information. Something like git review procedure for
> wireshark source/gerrit.
>
>                                                 Sincerely yours,
>
>                                                         Jirka Novak
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> _______________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:[email protected]?subject=
> unsubscribe
>
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to