Em 23-12-2013 19:21, Igor Živković escreveu: > On 12/23/2013 10:05 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> Em 23-12-2013 14:27, Igor Živković escreveu: >>> On 12/23/2013 05:20 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >>>> Em 23-12-2013 12:14, [email protected] escreveu: >>>>> Author: igor >>>>> Date: Mon Dec 23 07:14:25 2013 >>>>> New Revision: 12437 >>>>> >>>>> Log: >>>>> remove pcre from wireshark dependencies >>>> >>>> Did you remove because it is required by other dependencies? Please, >>>> tell which one. I am asking it because I need to improve (a lot) my >>>> knowledge about dependencies. >>> >>> I couldn't find in the source code where it's used directly. It might be >>> used via GLib though. >>> >> >> Thanks, Igor, >> >> I also could not find pcre at the beginning, but then I did: >> >> {{{ >> $ find -iname \*pcre\* >> ./epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c >> $ grep -ri pcre >> ... >> Makefile.nmake: rm -r -f pcre-6.4 >> Makefile.nmake: rm -r -f pcre-7.0 >> tools/fix-encoding-args.pl: FT_PCRE >> AUTHORS: Display filter operator: matches (PCRE syntax) >> ocbook/dfilter2xml.pl: 'FT_PCRE', 'Perl Compatible >> Regular Expression', >> packaging/nsis/uninstall.nsi:Delete "$INSTDIR\pcrepattern.3.txt" >> packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires: pcre-devel >> rawshark.c: case FT_PCRE: >> rawshark.c: return "FT_PCRE"; >> epan/enterprise-numbers: dan&blipcreative.com >> epan/CMakeLists.txt: ftypes/ftype-pcre.c >> epan/wslua/wslua_proto.c: ftypes.UINT_BYTES, ftypes.IPv4, ftypes.IPv6, >> ftypes.IPXNET, ftypes.FRAMENUM, ftypes.PCRE, ftypes.GUID >> epan/wspython/wspy_dissector.py:FT_PCRE, >> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in: ftype-none.lo ftype-pcre.lo ftype-string.lo >> ftype-time.lo \ >> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in: ftype-pcre.c \ >> epan/ftypes/Makefile.in:@AMDEP_TRUE@@am__include@ >> @am__quote@./$(DEPDIR)/ftype-pcre.Plo@am__quote@ >> epan/ftypes/ftypes.h: FT_PCRE, /* a compiled Perl-Compatible >> Regular >> Expression object */ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the >> dfilter semcheck() would have >> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) { >> epan/ftypes/ftype-bytes.c: regex, /* Compiled >> PCRE */ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the >> dfilter semcheck() would have >> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) { >> epan/ftypes/ftype-string.c: regex, /* Compiled >> PCRE */ >> epan/ftypes/Makefile.common: ftype-pcre.c \ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: /* fv_b is always a FT_PCRE, otherwise the >> dfilter semcheck() would have >> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: if (strcmp(fv_b->ftype->name, "FT_PCRE") != 0) { >> epan/ftypes/ftype-tvbuff.c: regex, /* Compiled >> PCRE */ >> epan/ftypes/ftypes.c: ftype_register_pcre(); >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * $Id: ftype-pcre.c 48424 2013-03-19 19:02:25Z >> etxrab $ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Perl-Compatible Regular Expression (PCRE) >> internal field type. >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * compilation and studying of a PCRE pattern >> in dfilters. >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from a parsed string pattern. >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:/* Generate a FT_PCRE from an unparsed string >> pattern. >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: * and we want to store the compiled PCRE RE >> object into the value. */ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c:ftype_register_pcre(void) >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: static ftype_t pcre_type = { >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: FT_PCRE, /* ftype */ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: "FT_PCRE", /* name */ >> epan/ftypes/ftype-pcre.c: ftype_register(FT_PCRE, &pcre_type); >> epan/ftypes/ftypes-int.h:void ftype_register_pcre(void); >> epan/proto.c: case FT_PCRE: >> epan/proto.c: { FT_PCRE, "FT_PCR" }, >> epan/proto.c: case FT_PCRE: >> epan/proto.c: /* FT_PCRE never appears as a type for >> a registered >> field. It is >> epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c: guint32 u32RPCRes; >> epan/dissectors/packet-dcom.c: >> hf_dcom_variant_rpc_res, &u32RPC >> ... >> }}} >> >> After that, I thought I should leave it as optional. So I was wrong, >> doing that, you think? >> > > Yep, the only relevant part is: > > packaging/rpm/SPECS/wireshark.spec.in:#BuildRequires: pcre-devel > > which suggests that it might have been used in the past. >
Thanks, Igor., I hope you have seen the rest: there are many more places where it appears. I put only a small part. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
