http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2190
------- Comment #2 from jyoung@xxxxxxx 2008-01-13 08:47 GMT -------
Created an attachment (id=1378)
--> (http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1378&action=view)
voip.call2.pcap - useful to replicate bug 2190
The trace file voip.call2.pcap has been attched to the bug report.
This trace file can be used (along with gdb and the steps outlined in comment
#1) to replicate bug 2190. This bug can also be reproduced simply by running
Wireshark within valgrind.
Here is how I have been running valgrind and Wireshark:
valgrind \
--trace-children=yes \
--leak-check=full \
--track-fds=yes \
--num-callers=50 \
--time-stamp=yes \
--freelist-vol=100000000 \
-v \
./wireshark;
Wireshark runs VERY slow when run within valgrind.
It may take perhaps one or two minutes simply for Wireshark to initally load.
It will take another minute or two for Wireshark to open and process the trace
file voip.call2.pcap.
It will take another few minutes for Wireshark to open the Statistics -> VoIP
Calls menu item.
Wireshark WILL really be sluggish and slow to respond to mouse movements and
button clicks. Simply be patient, Wireshark will eventually respond! ;-)
At this point it's not the valgrind messages we are concerned with (although
there are some items that probably need to be addressed (eventually)). I
simply have been using valgrind as a reliable way of reproducing this bug
outside of gdb.
Without the assistance of gdb or valgrind, triggering this bug is really a crap
shoot.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.