[Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

Hi folks! I'm progressing in the syncthing dissector. Wireshark compiled without hassle on Manjaro (Arch derivative). I love the wireshark codebase, it's refreshing to see a large project that just works... Anyway I have two questions: 1. I'm not familiar with GDB and could not set a breakpoint

Re: [Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 9:40 AM Antoine d'Otreppe wrote: > Hi folks! > > I'm progressing in the syncthing dissector. Wireshark compiled without > hassle on Manjaro (Arch derivative). I love the wireshark codebase, it's > refreshing to see a large project that just works... > Thanks :). > > > A

Re: [Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 9:40 AM Antoine d'Otreppe wrote: > 2. I used the fuzz-test.sh, looks nice, but how many passes should I run > to have adequate testing? > That's an interesting question. I don't recall how many passes I used in the past for fuzzing my dissectors. Moreover no default numbe

Re: [Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:27:32AM +0100, Dario Lombardo wrote: > > 1. I'm not familiar with GDB and could not set a breakpoint in my > > functions. Is there a trick to it? How do you run it? > > What's exactly your issue? When I run > > gdb --args run/wireshark > break filename.c:xxx > > I'm as

Re: [Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:26:54AM +0100, Peter Wu wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:27:32AM +0100, Dario Lombardo wrote: > > > 1. I'm not familiar with GDB and could not set a breakpoint in my > > > functions. Is there a trick to it? How do you run it? > > > > What's exactly your issue? When I

Re: [Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

Hmmm, yeah I saw the "do you want dynamic libs", and then I said no. Guess I was tired... I'll try that! Thanks! ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, November 12, 2018 10:27 AM, Dario Lombardo wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 9:40 AM Antoine d'Otreppe > wrote: > >> Hi folks! >> >> I'm

Re: [Wireshark-dev] GDB / Fuzz test ?

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:42 AM Dario Lombardo wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 9:40 AM Antoine d'Otreppe > wrote: > >> 2. I used the fuzz-test.sh, looks nice, but how many passes should I run >> to have adequate testing? >> > > That's an interesting question. I don't recall how many passes I us

[Wireshark-dev] No activity in Change 29980 for a while

Hi, Change 29980 seems to be stalled. It has been a while and there is no review or any kind of activity. Could you please have a look at it? Regards Ismael ___ Sent via:Wireshar

Re: [Wireshark-dev] No activity in Change 29980 for a while

I made you a couple of comments on 1st of Nov. I'm waiting your updates. On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 7:30 PM Ismael Mendez wrote: > Hi, > > Change 29980 seems to be > stalled. It has been a while and there is no review or any kind of > activity. Could you p

Re: [Wireshark-dev] No activity in Change 29980 for a while

On Nov 12, 2018, at 8:27 AM, Ismael Mendez wrote: > Change 29980 seems to be stalled. It has been a while 11 days, to be precise; the last comment was made on 2018-11-01, and it's now 2018-11-12 in my time zone. > and there is no review or any kind of activity. Could you please have a look >