Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] What's the reason we have packet-dcerpc-epm.c and packet-dcer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Because one is a different version of interface than the other.
We have EPM version 4 calls in Transarc DCE/DFS.
I can send you some examples if you wish.
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:08:49 -0800 Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx>
wrote:
>Hi List!
>
>Why do we have both files?
>
>I wanted to start a bugfix in the epm dissector (epm_dissect_tower
>being
>able to dissect both little and big endian, currently only able to
>
>dissect little endian)
>
>Then I've noticed, that we have two files: packet-dcerpc-epm.c and
>
>.._epm4.c, which have only minor differences.
>
>
>I've compared both files (replacing all appearances of epm4 by
>epm, so
>my diff tool wasn't confused :-).
>
>I've found the following differences (with line number), diff
>attached:
>
>1) 76/733: of course the interface version number differs (3 / 4)
>2) 274/305/421/717: recently done "RPC over HTTP" patch: only in
>epm but
>not in epm4, I would guess it's simply forgotten in epm4, should
>be
>copied to epm4
>3) 399: little/big endian difference, I would guess that's a bug
>in epm
>or epm4, fixed only in one of the files
>
>So the only real differences are bugfixes/enhancements only done
>in one
>of the two files, which should be fixed anyway.
>
>Why do we have two files here then? Currently, this will only lead
>to
>maintenance problems like the ones described above.
>
>Is there a reason against merging the two files together (putting
>both
>protocol dissectors in it), so people changing something in it
>will
>probably correctly change both versions?
>
>Regards, ULFL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify
Version: Hush 2.4
wkYEARECAAYFAkHEaCQACgkQFh/Ot+gyoF5e0ACeOG5kz9oEBompZdnB/GjNFa/iSKIA
oLj+sogIpjuTE+v6CbpsdsKw1ud0
=bH0G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
