[Anders Broman <anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

And if its pure debbuging use #ifdef's

#ifdef MY_PROTO_DEBUG

#endif

Regards

Anders

---

From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Martin Mathieson
Sent: den 25 november 2011 15:39
To: mattator@xxxxxxxxx; Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Some questions about licensing/core

Hi,

You could consider adding a dissector preference that 
controlled how much detail should be displayed,
with a sensible default 
setting.

Regards,
Martin

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Teto <mattator@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks for that answer. I will propose a patch to add energywise
dissection into the core when ready.

I was wondering what was the wireshark-way to add debug info only when
needed. Right now my dissector displays a lot of info, which might be
indigest in the end. But I wish I could display those infos when
debugging (even if that means recompiling).

Matt

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Congratulations with your first dissector.
> Now indeed it's time to look into what you can do with it. As you correctly noticed
> Wireshark is GPL licensed. That means that software that uses an API in this software
> falls under this license. That means (in short) that source code has to be provided
> for the object code which is distributed. Dissectors (plugins or not) use the Wireshark
> APIs, so are subject to the GPL.
>
> For the second part is good to know that a plugin dissector is nothing more than a
> dissector with a well defined plugin interface. Strip away this interface and you'll
> end up with a bare dissector, which can easily integrate into the core. README.developer
> should point you in the right direction.
> The preference for build in dissectors comes from the fact that it makes life for the
> core developers easier. If you want to keep the dissector for yourself, then by all
> means keep it as plugin. If you want to contribute it to the general repository you
> may get the request to convert it.
>
> Thanks,
> Jaap
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:12:19 +0100, Teto wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> After having asked many questions on that mailing-list, I finally
>> succeeded in programming my plugin (still a lot to do but yet it works
>> as it is now) and starts wondering about licensing. Wireshark is GPL.
>> From what I understand it means that any work based on wireshark must
>> be GPL (if you want to redistribute it and contrary to FreeBSD for
>> example). Just to make sure, does that include plugins as well ?
>>
>> I remember having read that plugins would best go into the core. Is
>> that a lot of work translating a plugin into the core ? I mean right
>> now a plugin is enough for me but if it's best and easy to make it
>> native, I can do it.
>>
>> Once more, thanks for your reactivity over the past 2 months.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>
___________________________________________________________________________
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