Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Unable to run wireshark, tshark or dumpcap from the build di
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:39:43 +0200
Hi,

A clean build usually takes care of this.

Thanks,
Jaap

On 10/01/2010 08:32 PM, Christopher Maynard wrote:

I am unable to run wireshark, tshark or dumpcap from the build directory.
The failures are as follows:

[cmaynard@harley ~/wireshark]$  WIRESHARK_RUN_FROM_BUILD_DIRECTORY=1
./wireshark -h
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-wireshark: symbol lookup error:
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-wireshark: undefined symbol:
gsm_a_dtap_msg_tp_strings

[cmaynard@harley ~/wireshark]$ WIRESHARK_RUN_FROM_BUILD_DIRECTORY=1 ./tshark -h
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-tshark: Symbol `gsm_a_dtap_msg_rr_strings'
has different size in shared object, consider re-linking
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-tshark: symbol lookup error:
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-tshark: undefined symbol:
gsm_a_sacch_msg_rr_strings

[cmaynard@harley ~/wireshark]$ WIRESHARK_RUN_FROM_BUILD_DIRECTORY=1 ./dumpcap -h
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-dumpcap: symbol lookup error:
/home/cmaynard/wireshark/.libs/lt-dumpcap: undefined symbol:
init_process_policies

I first hit this problem with a customized version of 1.4.0, so I went back to
the pristine 1.4.0 source and encountered the same problem.  I tried yet again
with SVN34314, but with the same results.

The system I am trying to run this on is RHEL5.  "uname -a" shows:
Linux harley 2.6.18-8.el5 #1 SMP Fri Jan 26 14:15:14 EST 2007 x86_64 x86_64
x86_64 GNU/Linux

This works for capinfos, editcap, mergecap and text2pcap.

Is there something I'm doing wrong here?  Those symbols are all in
epan/.libs/libwireshark.so.  My guess is that the binaries are linking against
the much older already installed version of wireshark instead of the new one,
but how do I fix this?  I thought WIRESHARK_RUN_FROM_BUILD_DIRECTORY=1 was
supposed to take care of this.  Any ideas?

Thanks.
- Chris