Joerg Mayer wrote: > That's the type of bugfix that doesn't make much sense. Just a dummy > read to squelch the warning without fixing the reason that the waring > was generated in the first place:
Yes, that's the wrong fix. > To state this differently: What happens, if the read doesn't return the > necessary amount of data? Bad things - or, at least, not ideal things. I've checked in changes in some places to check for read failures. Some of the RTP code doesn't have an immediately obvious way to fail out of the analysis operation on a read failure, so I left that as is for now, but it should be fixed. _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
