I can't comment on the Windows binary distribution issue but Pascal's suggestion of using SUSE's sounds promising. I will attempt building on Windows and comment on the Gerrit issue later today.
Ethernet POWERLINK specifies XML Device Description (XDD) as its sole format [1]. EDS (Windows .ini-like format) files are used occasionally, owing to its CANopen roots, but are much less common in usage. Commercial tools as well as openPOWERLINK generate XML files. The revised dissector [2] also supports EDS via Glib's GKeyFile unconditionally. [1] http://www.ethernet-powerlink.org/en/downloads/technical-documents/action/open-download/download/epsg-311-v110-ds-xml-device-description/?no_cache=1 [2] https://github.com/epl-viz/dissector (Needs to be converted back to a static dissector) On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Graham Bloice <graham.blo...@trihedral.com> wrote: > > > On 5 April 2017 at 14:11, Ahmad Fatoum <ah...@a3f.at> wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> I was advised on Gerrit to post this issue here as to garner wider input. >> >> This concerns proposed Change-Id I13c0a2f408fb5c21bad7ab3d7971e >> 0fa8ed7d783 [1] intending to add libxml2 as optional dependency to >> Wireshark. >> >> I am currently preparing to submit upstream, changes I did to the EPL v2 >> dissector (packet-epl.c). >> >> A significant change is the ability to optionally read in user-supplied >> XML device descriptions and to extract type/description/mapping information >> for aiding the dissection. See this previous submission of mine to the >> mailing list: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev/201701/ >> msg00154.html >> >> >> Seeing as there also has been interest for libxml2 support in dissectors >> in the past: >> >> https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev/201005/msg00108.html >> >> https://ask.wireshark.org/questions/36063/using-libxml2-in- >> my-own-dissector >> >> >> I think, it would be a good idea to have this as optional dependency as >> Glib's GMarkup may be inadequate or inconvenient for parsing actual XML. >> >> >> Looking forward to your feedback. >> >> Best regards, >> Ahmad Fatoum >> >> [1] https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/20912/ >> > Thanks for the post, > > 1. Where will the Windows binaries come from and are these supported long > term? The libXml2 downloads page indicates another site provides Windows > binaries [1]. The binaries at that site in the 64 bit directory seem to be > the most recent and are labelled as libXml2-2.9.3 [2]. The current release > of libXml2 is 2.9.4 which has a number of security fixes among other bug > fixes and enhancements [3] so it would appear that the Windows binaries are > not being maintained. > > 2. According to the diagram at [1], libXml2 depends on iconv and zlib. > We currently build our own zlib, will that be suitable for the libXml2 > dependency? What will be the source of the iconv binary (iconv-1.14 is > available in the same download area as libXml2 [2])? > > 3. The readme.txt in the download area ([2]) has some "interesting" text: > > These are experimental 64bit binaries. For completeness, 32bit binaries > built using the same method are also included. > > The libraries in these packages are made using GCC (MinGW) toolchain. It is > presently not possible to use these libraries with any recent version of the > Microsoft Visual C compiler because of conflicting C-runtimes. To help you > resist the temptation, the import libraries (.LIB) are not provided at all. > If you need these libraries in an environment which mandates the use of the > Microsoft toolchain, you will have to build them from source yourself. > > and inspection of the download shows this is true, so it appears that > we'll need to rebuild to obtain the import .lib file. > > 4. Microsoft have a Visual Studio porting effort underway called vcpkg > [4], that does include libXml2, but unfortunately is only for VS2015 or > later. If we move to VS2015 for main releases (post 2.4 release) then this > may be a viable source for libXml2 and other packages we use. It might be > possible to use this to build VS2013 libXml2. > > 5. Are there any manufacturers or tools that produce XML device > description files for the EPL dissector such that choosing XML as the input > format is the most sensible choice, or would another format be just as > applicable? > > > [1]: https://www.zlatkovic.com/libxml.en.html > [2]: ftp://ftp.zlatkovic.com/libxml/64bit/ > [3]: http://xmlsoft.org/news.html > [4]: https://github.com/Microsoft/vcpkg > > -- > Graham Bloice > > > ____________________________________________________________ > _______________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> > Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject= > unsubscribe >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
