Comment # 4
on bug 8843
from Jeff Morriss
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > A few comments:
> >
> > That "if(!tree) return" statement needs to be removed because the column
> > values are set below that (column stuff must be set regardless of whether we
> > have a tree or not).
> >
> > There are a couple new proto_tree_add_text()'s in here which look like they
> > should be adding real (filterable) items--why not use proto_tree_add_item()?
> >
> > I think that tvb_length_remaining() call should actually be
> > tvb_reported_length_remaining() (in case there a capture is taken with a
> > snapshot length.
> >
> > Also, could you provide a sample capture which demonstrates the new code?
>
> I can do the changes you asked for, but I based my code on the
> dissect_sbc_serviceactionin16 code which is already in the same file. Since
> this is already in the repo, I assumed this was the correct approach to do
> it. I suppose changes will have to made to both ? Will provide sample capture
Ideally those problems would be fixed in that (and maybe other) functions too,
but I certainly wouldn't hold up inclusion of your (fixed) patch because
there's problems in the old code.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.
