Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
From: Anil <anilkumar911@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:44:25 +0530
compiling on a different machine, the problem does not show up. Wondering what cleanup needs to be done on the old build machine. Are there any files other than under the source tree, that needs to be cleaned up ?
--AnilOn Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Graham Bloice <graham.bloice@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As a cross check you can always look at the buildbot status: https://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/waterfallIf the buildbots succeed in compiling the latest master and you don't, then it's likely that the problem is in your environment.On 16 March 2015 at 04:28, Anil <anilkumar911@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev-- AnilBut all of them yield the same result. I have not tried building on a different machine. I'll do it now.3) downloaded the latest tarball of source and compiled in a different folder.2) deleted the build folder (the one described in README.CMAKE)1) did a clean buildPascal --Thanks for the response. I tired various things.On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:___________________________________________________________________________2015-03-15 14:16 GMT+01:00 Anil <anilkumar911@xxxxxxxxx>:I get the below errorHi --I have been seeing this problem with the wireshark since 12 Mar 2015.
anil@anilpc:~/ws_srcpkg/build$ ./run/wireshark-gtk
18:26:50 Err Field 'Src Vm Name' (nstrace.src_vm) is an integral value (FT_INT64) but is being displayed as BASE_NONE
Trace/breakpoint trapI can see that enum (enum ftenum) values are different in different files (frames) as seen from GDB.
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00007ffff6593c13 in g_logv () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libglib-2.0.so.0
#1 0x00007ffff6593d72 in g_log () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libglib-2.0.so.0
#2 0x00007ffff306df34 in tmp_fld_check_assert (hfinfo=0x7fffe4867698 <hf+88>, hfinfo@entry=0x22e3b)
at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/epan/proto.c:5751
#3 proto_register_field_init (hfinfo=hfinfo@entry=0x7fffe4867698 <hf+88>, parent=parent@entry=142907)
at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/epan/proto.c:5924
#4 0x00007ffff306e1c9 in proto_register_field_common (proto=proto@entry=0x8694a0, hfi=hfi@entry=0x7fffe4867698 <hf+88>,
parent=parent@entry=142907) at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/epan/proto.c:5402
#5 0x00007ffff30751e1 in proto_register_field_array (parent=142907, hf=hf@entry=0x7fffe4867640 <hf>,
num_records=num_records@entry=28) at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/epan/proto.c:5431
#6 0x00007fffe4666447 in proto_register_ns () at packet-nstrace.c:496
#7 0x00007ffff65a96b8 in g_slist_foreach () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libglib-2.0.so.0
#8 0x00007ffff30750d2 in proto_init (
register_all_protocols_func=register_all_protocols_func@entry=0x422910 <register_all_protocols@plt>,
register_all_handoffs_func=register_all_handoffs_func@entry=0x41f910 <register_all_protocol_handoffs@plt>,
cb=cb@entry=0x4b3290 <splash_update>, client_data=client_data@entry=0x9ce360)
at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/epan/proto.c:497
#9 0x00007ffff30550bb in epan_init (register_all_protocols_func=0x422910 <register_all_protocols@plt>,
register_all_handoffs_func=0x41f910 <register_all_protocol_handoffs@plt>, cb=0x4b3290 <splash_update>,
client_data=client_data@entry=0x9ce360) at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/epan/epan.c:116
#10 0x0000000000423726 in main (argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffdf58) at /home/anil/ws_srcpkg/wireshark-1.99.3/ui/gtk/main.c:2511
(gdb) p (int) FT_STRINGZ
$1 = 24
(gdb) frame 6
#6 0x00007fffe4666447 in proto_register_ns () at packet-nstrace.c:496
496 packet-nstrace.c: No such file or directory.
(gdb) p (int) FT_STRINGZ
$2 = 18Hi Anil,it's probably time for you to clean and rebuild as you have some objects that use an old ftenum (the dependency check probably get confused at some point and did not recompile all the files adter the ftypes.h update for FT_(U)INT_(40|48|56) addition).Pascal.
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>
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe--Graham BloiceSoftware DeveloperTrihedral UK Limited
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- From: Guy Harris
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- References:
- [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- From: Anil
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- From: Pascal Quantin
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- From: Anil
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- From: Graham Bloice
- [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- Prev by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] enum preferences vs Go Fish
- Next by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- Previous by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- Next by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Latest code broken?
- Index(es):