Developer support list for Wireshark ()

mmann78 | 25 Jul 2012 03:31

idl2wrs generation of display filters

I was running checkfiltername.pl and discovered that the idl2wrs generated dissectors don't follow the convention of using the filter name registered with the protocol as the start of any display filter name. Was this just an oversight, or was it intentional?

I believe the attached patch will fix the problem, but I don't know the first thing about the idl2wrs generation or how to regenerate the necessary dissector files, so I thought I'd send it out for comment.

Index: tools/wireshark_gen.py
===================================================================
--- tools/wireshark_gen.py	(revision 43966)
+++ tools/wireshark_gen.py	(working copy)
 <at>  <at>  -1641,7 +1641,7  <at>  <at> 

    static hf_register_info hf[] = {
         /* field that indicates the currently ongoing request/reply exchange */
-		{&hf_operationrequest, {"Request_Operation"," <at> protocol_name <at> .Request_Operation",FT_STRING,BASE_NONE,NULL,0x0,NULL,HFILL}},
+		{&hf_operationrequest, {"Request_Operation","giop- <at> dissector_name <at> .Request_Operation",FT_STRING,BASE_NONE,NULL,0x0,NULL,HFILL}},

       /* no fields yet */

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@...>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@...?subject=unsubscribe

headers

Christopher Maynard | 26 Jul 2012 03:57

Re: idl2wrs generation of display filters

 <mmann78 <at> ...> writes:

> I was running checkfiltername.pl and discovered that the idl2wrs generated
dissectors don't follow the convention of using the filter name registered with
the protocol as the start of any display filter name.  Was this just an
oversight, or was it intentional?
> 

It doesn't look like the idl stuff has been touched in a long time (6+ years). 
Probably the author(s) simply didn't consider it at the time.

> I believe the attached patch will fix the problem, but I don't know the first
thing about the idl2wrs generation or how to regenerate the necessary dissector
files, so  I thought I'd send it out for comment.
> 

I have never generated the idl dissectors myself, but doc/README.idl2wrs seems
like the place to start.

- Chris

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev <at> wireshark.org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request <at> wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe

headers

Jeff Morriss | 26 Jul 2012 19:49

Re: idl2wrs generation of display filters

mmann78@... wrote:
> I was running checkfiltername.pl and discovered that the idl2wrs 
> generated dissectors don't follow the convention of using the filter 
> name registered with the protocol as the start of any display filter 
> name.  Was this just an oversight, or was it intentional?
> 
> I believe the attached patch will fix the problem, but I don't know the 
> first thing about the idl2wrs generation or how to regenerate the 
> necessary dissector files, so  I thought I'd send it out for comment.

I don't know much about the IDL stuff but I recently made a bunch of 
changes to it (and rebuilt the dissectors).  My cheat-sheet for how to 
re-generate them came from this check-in comment:

http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=39932



(Of course you also need the omniorb stuff, etc. first.)

If you don't want to muck with it I could try to apply this patch and 
regenerate but it'll probably be a few days before I'll have a chance.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@...>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@...?subject=unsubscribe

headers

mmann78 | 26 Jul 2012 20:09

Re: idl2wrs generation of display filters

No, I didn't really want to muck with it. The patch is a single line, so I can check it in, but I didn't know if I needed to regenerate the dissector files too, or if that came for "free" somehow (like a distclean, then build). Sounds like that's a "no".

If I need to have omniorb stuff, and you'd like the patch + the dissectors checked into a single revision, it'd be much easier if you did it. Timetable isn't really an issue, I'm just slowly cleaning up display filters to be ready for the 1.10 release.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev-IZ8446WsY0/dtAWm4Da02A@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Thu, Jul 26, 2012 1:55 pm
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] idl2wrs generation of display filters

mmann78-VsqqI1RANlHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org wrote: > I was running checkfiltername.pl and discovered that the idl2wrs > generated dissectors don't follow the convention of using the filter > name registered with the protocol as the start of any display filter > name. Was this just an oversight, or was it intentional? > > I believe the attached patch will fix the problem, but I don't know the > first thing about the idl2wrs generation or how to regenerate the > necessary dissector files, so I thought I'd send it out for comment. I don't know much about the IDL stuff but I recently made a bunch of changes to it (and rebuilt the dissectors). My cheat-sheet for how to re-generate them came from this check-in comment: http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=39932 :-)

(Of course you also need the omniorb stuff, etc. first.) If you don't want to muck with it I could try to apply this patch and regenerate but it'll probably be a few days before I'll have a chance. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev-IZ8446WsY0/dtAWm4Da02A@public.gmane.org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request-IZ8446WsY0/dtAWm4Da02A@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@...>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@...?subject=unsubscribe

headers

Jeff Morriss | 8 Aug 2012 05:38

Re: idl2wrs generation of display filters

(Finally) checked in r44325.

On 07/26/2012 02:09 PM, mmann78@... wrote:
> No, I didn't really want to muck with it.  The patch is a single line,
> so I can check it in, but I didn't know if I needed to regenerate the
> dissector files too, or if that came for "free" somehow (like a
> distclean, then build).  Sounds like that's a "no".
> If I need to have omniorb stuff, and you'd like the patch + the
> dissectors checked into a single revision, it'd be much easier if you
> did it.  Timetable isn't really an issue, I'm just slowly cleaning up
> display filters to be ready for the 1.10 release.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@...>
> To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@...>
> Sent: Thu, Jul 26, 2012 1:55 pm
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] idl2wrs generation of display filters
>
> mmann78@... 
<mailto:mmann78@...>  wrote:
>> I was running checkfiltername.pl and discovered that the idl2wrs
>> generated dissectors don't follow the convention of using the filter
>> name registered with the protocol as the start of any display filter
>> name.  Was this just an oversight, or was it intentional?
>>
>> I believe the attached patch will fix the problem, but I don't know the
>> first thing about the idl2wrs generation or how to regenerate the
>> necessary dissector files, so  I thought I'd send it out for comment.
>
> I don't know much about the IDL stuff but I recently made a bunch of
> changes to it (and rebuilt the dissectors).  My cheat-sheet for how to
> re-generate them came from this check-in comment:
>
> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=39932
>
> 
>
> (Of course you also need the omniorb stuff, etc. first.)
>
> If you don't want to muck with it I could try to apply this patch and
> regenerate but it'll probably be a few days before I'll have a chance.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@...  <mailto:wireshark-dev@...>>
> Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe:https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>               mailto:wireshark-dev-request@...?subject=unsubscribe
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@...>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>               mailto:wireshark-dev-request@...?subject=unsubscribe
>

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@...>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@...?subject=unsubscribe