Re: [tcpdump] After setjmp/longjmp update

[Denis Ovsienko via tcpdump-workers <tcpdump-workers () lists tcpdump org>]

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
> From: Denis Ovsienko <denis () ovsienko info>
>
> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 01:10:15 +0000
>
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2021 12:35:29 -0500
> Bill Fenner via tcpdump-workers <tcpdump-workers () lists tcpdump org>
> wrote:
>
> > I just wanted to share some of my thinking about how to proceed with
> > the truncation-related changes on the road to 5.0.0.
> >
> > 1. Improve code coverage for the printer that's being modified.  (This
> > ensures that the code being modified has a corresponding test pcap
> > that can be used by steps 2 and 3).
>
> Hello Bill.
>
> It used to be 31 test in tcpdump 4.3.0, now it is 571 test, and the
> coverage is still very far from complete, even more so for less common
> protocols. There is a steady consensus that it would be nice to have
> more tests, contributions are welcome as always.
>
> > 2. Use the trunc-o-matic tool from
> [...]
>
> Thank you for proposing this new tool. I see a potential for false
> positives, let me have some time to try it and to see if that's actually
> the case.
>
> > I also think that community members would be willing to chip in if the
> > effort was coordinated (e.g., open a github ticket for each printer
> > that needs this conversion, have a wiki page that talks about the
> > conversion process, etc.).  There's no need for the maintainers to
> > take on the work of all of the protocols.
>
> You mean well, but let me suggest after you walk a mile in these
> particular shoes you'll prefer a different wording, or maybe even a
> different idea.
>
> Francois-Xavier started this thread in September 2020 on the assumption
> that community members will want to contribute. It is January 2021 and
> except myself you are the first ever to discuss, thank you. Let's
> concur that in foreseeable future there will be a meaningful amount of
> work that will be never done unless the project maintainers do it.
>
> This conversion is an example of such work and it is especially
> labour-demanding one. Francois-Xavier has done most of the
> longjmp()-associated work so far, so he has the most say in this
> particular matter and tcpdump 4.99.0 should have his name on it. He
> proposes to continue the source code conversion, and to me it makes the
> most sense.
>
> That said, if you find it more important to propose a text with a
> "definition of done", is would likely remain relevant after the
> conversion. It could fit well in or around the CONTRIBUTING file.
> A separate ticket for every file to me seems to be not worth the
> hassle considering how few people need to coordinate now. That said, a
> weekly/fortnightly status update on the list could be a useful addition.
>
> Cheers.
>
> -- 
>     Denis Ovsienko
>
> --- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
tcpdump-workers mailing list
tcpdump-workers () lists tcpdump org
https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers