Hi,
> Dnia 18 kwietnia 2013 17:56 Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
>> ...except in those places where the UI *should* be different. For example, when showing a JPEG, Wireshark doesn't have multiple items in the "packet list" pane, because the JPEG is in, for example, a single HTTP message. However, in Fileshark, the dissector might want to have separate items in the list pane for different parts of the JPEG file.
>
>Of course, yes. But some components doesn't need to be reimplemented (for example, hex browser).
>
>> > I think it would be reasonable to make it possible to use the same dissectors as for Wireshark
>>
>> Yes, that's a lot of the point of Fileshark.
> I just wanted to emphasize this.
I guess current file dissectors are ok (they are only not complete). I propose start work on Fileshark by write simple file dissector for Wireshark. You meet dissector API and Wireshark. For example: *.bmp
It sometimes used on webpages, so it is in Wireshark scope. Also you will be able to add "Preview" to Wireshark (new tab like reassemble tabs? shows only when click image dissector?).
I will be happy to see only one tool, not two separated tools. I hope current executable can be extended.
By the way, if you want some help, feel free to contact with me.
Pozdrawiam / Best regards
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michał Łabędzki, Software Engineer
Tieto Corporation
Product Engineering Services
http://www.tieto.com / http://www.tieto.pl
---
ASCII: Michal Labedzki
e-mail: michal.labedzki@xxxxxxxxx
location: Swobodna 1 Street, 50-088 Wrocław, Poland
room: 5.01 (desk next to 5.08)
---
Please note: The information contained in this message may be legally privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorised use, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank You.
---
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
---
Tieto Poland spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością z siedzibą w Szczecinie, ul. Malczewskiego 26. Zarejestrowana w Sądzie Rejonowym Szczecin-Centrum w Szczecinie, XIII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego pod numerem 0000124858. NIP: 8542085557. REGON: 812023656. Kapitał zakładowy: 4 271500 PLN
________________________________________
From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of okordy [okordy@xxxxx]
Sent: 18 April 2013 18:05
To: Developer support list for Wireshark; Guy Harris
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] GSOC ideas: protocol buffers dissector andFileshark
Dnia 18 kwietnia 2013 17:56 Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
> ...except in those places where the UI *should* be different. For example, when showing a JPEG, Wireshark doesn't have multiple items in the "packet list" pane, because the JPEG is in, for example, a single HTTP message. However, in Fileshark, the dissector might want to have separate items in the list pane for different parts of the JPEG file.
Of course, yes. But some components doesn't need to be reimplemented (for example, hex browser).
> > I think it would be reasonable to make it possible to use the same dissectors as for Wireshark
>
> Yes, that's a lot of the point of Fileshark.
I just wanted to emphasize this.
___________________________________________________________________________
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