Huge thanks to our Platinum Members Endace and LiveAction,
and our Silver Member Veeam, for supporting the Wireshark Foundation and project.

Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [PATCH] NFS Anonymizer tap

From: "Anders Broman" <a.broman@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 06:38:52 +0100

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] För Shehjar Tikoo
Skickat: den 8 mars 2007 01:05
Till: Developer support list for Wireshark
Ämne: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [PATCH] NFS Anonymizer tap

Guy Harris wrote:
>> On Mar 7, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
>> 
>>> If not, is it even necessary to make it a plugin? considering that 
>>> it can be run only when *-z nfsanon* is in the command line.
>> 
>> It's not *necessary* to make it a plugin.
>> 
>> However, it's sufficiently specialized - and is violating a 
>> sufficient number of rules for Wireshark code, namely "don't try to 
>> store into a tvbuff" - that it won't be incorporated into Wireshark 
>> as it stands, so it might be a bit more convenient for you if it's a 
>> plugin.

>Sure.

>If I leave it as it is, it'll be be convenient for people who
>want to use it. They'll just need to download the tap-nfsanon.c. Copy it
>to the source root dir, a one line addition in Makefile.common in
>TSHARK_TAP_SRC and rebuild(..starting from autogen of course..).

>I am not sure if there are benefits of turning it into a plugin,

The main benefit is that you can distribute a plugin as a binary
That'll work with the Wireshark version it was compiled for.

>since both approaches require a full rebuild. As a tap, it'll
>require less number of additions to top-level make/config files so I
>won't need to *maintain* a patch for the makefiles. What do you think?
>
>In any case, many thanks to everyone for all the help.
>
>Regards
>Shehjar
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev