Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Fwd: Re: Storing Generated Code in Git [Was: master 9079e3a: Cheat and try to fi

[Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jun 23, 2014, at 23:03, Anders Broman <a.broman58@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Den 24 jun 2014 03:18 skrev "Evan Huus" <eapache@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Anders Broman <a.broman58@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ---------- Vidarebefordrat meddelande ----------
>> Från: "Evan Huus" <eapache@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Datum: 24 jun 2014 00:14
>> Ämne: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Storing Generated Code in Git [Was: master 9079e3a: Cheat and try to fix the generated file manually.]
>> Till: "Developer support list for Wireshark" <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Kopia:
>>
>> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Jun 23, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > As far as I can see, the main arguments for storing generated code in git are:
>> >> > - not all platforms have the tools necessary to generate the code
>> >> > - generating it can take lots of time
>> >>
>> >> I see four different types of people/groups building from source:
>> >>
>> >>         1) people who just want the latest Wireshark for a platform for which there are no binary packages;
>> >>
>> >>         2) people who want to build the latest Wireshark from source rather than trusting binary packages;
>> >>
>> >>         3) people who want to do Wireshark development;
>> >>
>> >>         4) people building binary packages for a release.
>> >>
>> >> People in group 1 would, presumably, want a source tarball that requires as few tools to build as possible.
>> >>
>> >> People in group 2 might, or might not, want that, depending on whether they trust the tools that generate source.
>> >>
>> >> People in group 3 might well need to re-build the generated source files, as they might be modifying the source from which they're generated.  They could use a tarball as long as they're only tweaking existing C or C++ code, but if they're adding new code or modifying something that's used to generate other source. they're just like people building from Git.
>> >>
>> >> People in group 4 probably could build from a tarball; if they don't want to do that, I have no problem requiring them to have *all* the tools necessary to generate the code or making the process take longer.
>> >>
>> >> So perhaps what we should do is:
>> >>
>> >>         not check generated code into Git;
>> >>
>> >>         put all generated code into the source tarballs.
>> >
>> >
>> > That works fine for me. I have no philosophical objections to putting generated code into a source tarball.
>>
>> Presumably we should rebuild all the DCERPC files as well at buildtime then?
>
> If that's possible, yes. I don't actually know how to generate them, so I don't know how fast and/or cross-platform it is.
>

So to conclude we should build everyting from source and platforms that do not support the tools would have to build from tarballs with the generated sources?

Not necessarily. If the tools aren't cross-platform we don't have much choice but to include the generated code. However, the asn1 generator is a python script runnable basically anywhere, and I expect most of the other generators are also cross-platform.

Generated files:
DCE-RPC (I think we should start with those as it is anoying not beeing  able to generate those.)  tools required?

Corba based dissectors(parlamentet,tango...) Idl2ws+external packages.

X11 tools?

Asn1 based,  asn2ws

?

This probably means building sources on linux and from tarballs on all other platforms as the tools will not be available.

Best regards
Anders

> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
            mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe