Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: [Wireshark-commits] master 9079e3a: Cheat and try to fix the generated file manually.


From: Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:36:38 +0200

Den 23 jun 2014 20:11 skrev "Evan Huus" <eapache () gmail com>:

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com>
wrote:


Den 23 jun 2014 19:08 skrev "Evan Huus" <eapache () gmail com>:



I have nothing against the change in general, as long as we do it by
adding only the original .gperf file to git and run gperf during build to
generate C file.

I don't want to push this in absurdum but generating files on all
platforms might be difficult and puts extra requirement on the build
environment.
That said we should have the tools to and instructions on how to
generate all included files. I'm not sure that's true now.

Storing generated files in source control makes maintenance and patch
review much harder and puts extra requirements on us to keep things in
sync. I'd rather the computer do the extra work :)

We store C files and require a compiler, where we could just store the
compiled .o files in source control. To me this is much the same thing.

Balint and Jörg and I discussed that we would eventually like to remove
the ASN.1 generated source from git as well, and make that a standard part
of the build process.


I'm not convinced, just on a principle issue...




On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com>
wrote:


Den 23 jun 2014 18:18 skrev "Bálint Réczey" <balint () balintreczey hu>:



Hi,

2014-06-23 17:54 GMT+02:00 Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>:
I would *really* prefer we didn't do this.
Me, too. Going this way makes maintaining Wireshark really hard. And
for 1% speed increase in a very specific case

Well even small changes adds up...
I'd think Sip would be a fairly common usecase...

I generally don't agree with the approach and in this specific IMO
the
gains did not justify the introduction of an automatically
generated,
then manually slightly modified file.

I would also like to ask everyone to not rush merging changes
without
discussion to master. I usually wait one day or two for comments
before merging a review opened by me, sometimes more if others may
have very different opinion implementing the patch.

Thanks,
Balint



On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Wireshark code review
<code-review-do-not-reply () wireshark org> wrote:

URL:

https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=commit;h=9079e3ad1d32c594309a52ccef5936d11a93a55d
Submitter: Anders Broman (a.broman58 () gmail com)
Changed: branch: master
Repository: wireshark

Commits:

9079e3a by AndersBroman (anders.broman () ericsson com):

    Cheat and try to fix the generated file manually.

    Change-Id: Iabf1821aa0ef676ac4d1d7f2983460b2e671a98a
    Reviewed-on: https://code.wireshark.org/review/2573
    Reviewed-by: Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com>


Actions performed:

    from  c9a5fbe   Optimize sip_is_known_sip_header()
    adds  9079e3a   Cheat and try to fix the generated file
manually.


Summary of changes:
 epan/dissectors/packet-sip-hdrs.c |   30
+++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)


___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-commits mailing list
<wireshark-commits () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-commits
Unsubscribe:
https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-commits

mailto:wireshark-commits-request () wireshark org
?subject=unsubscribe




___________________________________________________________________________
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

___________________________________________________________________________
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



___________________________________________________________________________
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




___________________________________________________________________________
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



___________________________________________________________________________
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




___________________________________________________________________________
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
___________________________________________________________________________
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

Current thread: