Re: Wireshark PIDL generated dissectors

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Oct 7, 2013, at 3:05 PM, ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg () gmail com> wrote:

> The tool.
> I think that wireshark has been used a de-facto fork for PIDL the tool
> since many many years. But a fork that is occasionally synced back
> with upstream.
> That is the only way we can make sure that we will always be able to
> even compile the IDL in wireshark to a working dissector.

If you mean "the tool as a whole", not just "the back end", then

        1) there needs to be a spec for PIDL to which both PIDL processors would conform, and it should be sufficiently 
complete that any of Samba's PIDL files can be processed by a (non-buggy) conforming processor ("non-buggy" meaning 
that making it actually work is the responsibility of the maintainers of the processor);

        2) the maintainers of the spec, i.e. the Samba people, should inform us when the spec changes;

        3) the maintainers of the Wireshark PIDL processor, i.e. the Wireshark team, are responsible for changing that 
processor to follow the spec.
___________________________________________________________________________
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-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe