Wireshark PIDL generated dissectors

[Matthieu Patou]

On 10/04/2013 06:25 AM, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Thursday 03 October 2013 20:04:13 ronnie sahlberg wrote:
>>> What do you propose?
>> There is very little overlap between samba needs and wireshark needs for
>> PIDL. It is probably better to continue running two separate forks of PIDL,
>> one for samba and one for wireshark.
>>
>> Switching to samba PIDL seems to be a lot of work for miniscule gain.
>> And who will do the work?
> When have the wireshark IDL been updated last time? I mean the last time I
> checked I had to add netlogon flags manually cause there was no pidl
> generation and the up2date IDL file from samba weren't used at all.
Netlogon is a special beast because we have to remember things between 
packets and do some magic on some packets.

Last time I had a look it was far from being a perfect fit for the pidl 
generated files but with latest improvement in pidl it might be more 
doable but still not as easy as copying the .idl file and running pidl 
and doing a simple cnf for the one or two functions that are not 
generated correctly.
>
> Having a fork problably means you have 2 places with IDL files and a IDL code
> generator you have to touch just to get the latest information about the
> protocols.
As I said in a previous email ihmo there is only one place and this 
place is the samba tree for the moment.

We might have some work to do to insure that the regenerating the files 
for wireshark is as simple as checking out the samba-tree and running 
the pidl command.

Matthieu.

-- 
Matthieu Patou
Samba Team
http://samba.org