Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] Trouble converting .pcap file to XML (pdms) via command li
From: Sean Sparacio <seansparacio@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:00:09 -0500
Sorry I missed your reply.

All I'm really doing is creating a Windows process and starting Tshark
with the -r and -T arguments.  Once running, I populate a string with
the standard output using the Process.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd()
method.  From there, you can do whatever you want with it.
Namely...persist that string to a file.

C# snippet:

        private string ConvertPcapFileToXML(string TsharkPath,
            string SourcePcapFilePath)
        {
            string Arguments;
            string OutputText = "";
            Process p;
            ProcessStartInfo StartInfo;

            try
            {
                Arguments = String.Format("{0} {1} {2} {3}",
                    "-r",
                    SourcePcapFile,
                    "-T",
                    "pdml";

                StartInfo = new ProcessStartInfo();
                StartInfo.CreateNoWindow = true;
                StartInfo.FileName = TsharkPath;
                StartInfo.Arguments = Arguments;
                StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false;
                StartInfo.RedirectStandardOutput = true;
                StartInfo.RedirectStandardError = false;

                p = new Process();
                p.StartInfo = StartInfo;
                p.Start();
                OutputText = p.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd();
            }

            catch (Exception ex)
            {
                _AppLogger.LogException(ex);
            }

            return OutputText;
        }


>From: Stephen Fisher <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:28:04 -0700
>
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 03:47:57PM -0500, Sean Sparacio wrote:
>
>> I actually came up with a programmatic workaround, which I should have
>> done in the first place, as this will need to be an automated process.
>
>Care to share it with the list for others?
>
>> I very much appreciate the reply though, Stephen.
>
>You're welcome.