Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 07:03:36PM -0400, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:07 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote: In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably has a long lifetime ahead of it. How hard/painful would it be to install Lua 5.2.x? (I don't know the answer - just asking) It's a tiny little library compared to most of Wireshark's others, fwiw. Probably not too hard--I know Lua's small. But most users (who just do yum install lua) won't get it so we'll be losing Lua for 99% of the RHEL6 users. Maybe it's not that big a deal but it's worth some thought… Sadly, I know nothing about yum and RHEL6 other than as being an occasional user of it. It looks like there are plenty of yum repositories with Lua 5.2.x, but not for RHEL6. How does one go about requesting an upgrade of that - enter a ticket in Redhat as customer? (is that like crazy wishful thinking? I don’t know anything about their policies for such things) With RHEL being an Enterprise distribution, RHEL6 will likely try to stay at lua-5.1 for as long as it can. Likely until RHEL6 goes end-of-life. If lua-5.2 is completely backwards compatible (nothing deprecated, no behavior changes), a customer can open a support ticket and request an update for lua. But, these kind of requests are not granted often or easily. That said, most RHEL users will likely install Wireshark from the standard RHEL repositories on Red Hat Network. Even Wireshark as a 'leaf' package (nothing depends on it) is expected to be mostly backwards compatible (UI, commandline parameters, ...) when a version update is done. Wireshark in RHEL-6.5 has been updated to version 1.8 (RHEL-6.4 came with 1.6, iirc), and I see that as something out of the ordinary. Users that prefer/need a newer version of Wireshark, are probably building the binaries or packages themselves. They should not have much difficulties with building a lua update too. Alternatively, if you’re running RHEL6, can you try this: curl -R -O http://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-5.2.3.tar.gz # or 'wget http://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-5.2.3.tar.gz' instead tar zxf lua-5.2.3.tar.gz cd lua-5.2.3 make linux test If that works (and it should in theory), maybe it won’t be too painful to just add that to the install instructions or even write up a simple script to do it? (...just trying to think of a solution...) That surely is one possible solution :) Thanks, Niels -- Niels de Vos Sr. Software Maintenance Engineer Support Engineering Group Red Hat Global Support Services ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On 03/31/14 18:18, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote: Do you mean Wireshark would no longer compile/run if the Lua version was 5.2? Yes, that would be the ultimate goal. That way someone writing a Lua script and wants to share it with others doesn't have to worry about whether it will work for others or not. Lua 5.2 includes new built-in functions and lexical tokens that 5.1 did not, so writing one with 5.2 might not work if someone else uses 5.1. And of course it would be nice to get rid of the C-code that has to deal with both as well, and not have to test on both. Makes sense... In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably has a long lifetime ahead of it. How hard/painful would it be to install Lua 5.2.x? (I don't know the answer - just asking) It's a tiny little library compared to most of Wireshark's others, fwiw. Probably not too hard--I know Lua's small. But most users (who just do yum install lua) won't get it so we'll be losing Lua for 99% of the RHEL6 users. Maybe it's not that big a deal but it's worth some thought... ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:07 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote: In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably has a long lifetime ahead of it. How hard/painful would it be to install Lua 5.2.x? (I don't know the answer - just asking) It's a tiny little library compared to most of Wireshark's others, fwiw. Probably not too hard--I know Lua's small. But most users (who just do yum install lua) won't get it so we'll be losing Lua for 99% of the RHEL6 users. Maybe it's not that big a deal but it's worth some thought… Sadly, I know nothing about yum and RHEL6 other than as being an occasional user of it. It looks like there are plenty of yum repositories with Lua 5.2.x, but not for RHEL6. How does one go about requesting an upgrade of that - enter a ticket in Redhat as customer? (is that like crazy wishful thinking? I don’t know anything about their policies for such things) Alternatively, if you’re running RHEL6, can you try this: curl -R -O http://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-5.2.3.tar.gz # or 'wget http://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-5.2.3.tar.gz' instead tar zxf lua-5.2.3.tar.gz cd lua-5.2.3 make linux test If that works (and it should in theory), maybe it won’t be too painful to just add that to the install instructions or even write up a simple script to do it? (...just trying to think of a solution...) -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On 03/28/14 10:29, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. Do you mean Wireshark would no longer compile/run if the Lua version was 5.2? In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably has a long lifetime ahead of it. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On 3/28/14 8:42 AM, Pascal Quantin wrote: 2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com mailto:hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). That's correct. The Lua development teams is one of the few that provide Windows libraries that are useable without local changes. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Gerald Combs ger...@wireshark.org wrote: Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). That's correct. The Lua development teams is one of the few that provide Windows libraries that are useable without local changes. I just got an email from them that they've just released the Lua 5.2.3 binaries. :) -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote: Do you mean Wireshark would no longer compile/run if the Lua version was 5.2? Yes, that would be the ultimate goal. That way someone writing a Lua script and wants to share it with others doesn't have to worry about whether it will work for others or not. Lua 5.2 includes new built-in functions and lexical tokens that 5.1 did not, so writing one with 5.2 might not work if someone else uses 5.1. And of course it would be nice to get rid of the C-code that has to deal with both as well, and not have to test on both. In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably has a long lifetime ahead of it. How hard/painful would it be to install Lua 5.2.x? (I don't know the answer - just asking) It's a tiny little library compared to most of Wireshark's others, fwiw. -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
2014-03-28 20:32 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). Huh. I figured they were just being built from source. At my day job we just build the whole thing in statically, but we had to use our own anyway because we made some changes to the Lua engine to protect against bad Lua code, and we don't allow people to swap it out as a shared library/dll. http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaBinaries web page suggests to go to http://joedf.users.sourceforge.net/luabuilds/ for a 5.2.3 pre compiled binary but it does not include the header files. I guess I could get them from the source package. Yup. Hi, I just upgraded the Windows build system in ga1d4189 so as to use Lua 5.2.1. If required, we might change it to 5.2.3 later. Cheers, Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
If 5.2 has been out for three years at this point it sounds fine to me. On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu: +1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaBinaries web page suggests to go to http://joedf.users.sourceforge.net/luabuilds/ for a 5.2.3 pre compiled binary but it does not include the header files. I guess I could get them from the source package. Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu: +1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
BTW, to answer your question directly, no I don't think it's a big deal if you only run 5.2.1. The bugs fixed in 5.2.2 were pretty esoteric, and even more so those fixed in 5.2.3. FWIW, I use Lua 5.2.1 on my Mac all the time (because MacPorts hasn't updated their Lua installer to 5.2.3 yet, and I use MacPorts). -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu: +1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
+1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.comwrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org ?subject=unsubscribe -- Kenjiro NAKAYAMA nakayamakenj...@gmail.com GPG Key fingerprint = ED8F 049D E67A 727D 9A44 8E25 F44B E208 C946 5EB9 ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
+1 The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem. Cheers, Balint 2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com: +1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote: Howdy, Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1. There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, etc. There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. There was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since 2011. -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Kenjiro NAKAYAMA nakayamakenj...@gmail.com GPG Key fingerprint = ED8F 049D E67A 727D 9A44 8E25 F44B E208 C946 5EB9 ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Can we move to Lua 5.2.3 only?
On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com: The bugs are listed here: http://www.lua.org/bugs.html 5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012. What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one? Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere? Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm). Huh. I figured they were just being built from source. At my day job we just build the whole thing in statically, but we had to use our own anyway because we made some changes to the Lua engine to protect against bad Lua code, and we don't allow people to swap it out as a shared library/dll. http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaBinaries web page suggests to go to http://joedf.users.sourceforge.net/luabuilds/ for a 5.2.3 pre compiled binary but it does not include the header files. I guess I could get them from the source package. Yup. -hadriel ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
