On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 4:13 AM, Maynard, Chris
christopher.mayn...@gtech.com wrote:
... but since I'm not entirely sure what is needed here, I'll leave it to you
(or someone else) to make an appropriate change. I just wanted the builds to
succeed again so I could continue with some other
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Maynard, Chris
christopher.mayn...@gtech.com wrote:
Apologies, I meant to write:
if (!result || avail 0 || !result1 || childstatus != STILL_ACTIVE) {
I think I am too accustomed to *nix return values where 0 typically means
success, and so I read the
So should r45182 and r45189 be scheduled for backport to fix bug 6208?
- Chris
From: wireshark-commits-boun...@wireshark.org
[wireshark-commits-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of darkja...@wireshark.org
[darkja...@wireshark.org]
Sent: Friday, September
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:01:01PM -0400, Maynard, Chris wrote:
So should r45182 and r45189 be scheduled for backport to fix bug 6208?
I think r45189 is buggy, if wireshark is refiltering, and you get new packets,
some packets might have wrong relative timestamps (displayed, captured),
and wrong
Capture comments can be added/removed through the summary dialog as well.
- Chris
From: wireshark-commits-boun...@wireshark.org
[wireshark-commits-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of mart...@wireshark.org
[mart...@wireshark.org]
Sent: Sunday, September
As a positive surprise I noticed the API change for the dissector calls.
Where can I find the documentation describing the change best?
Any plans to change the true/false return from heuristic dissectors and
replace it in favor of the 0, 0, 0 approach used in new_dissector_t?
As far as I
On 9/29/2012 5:49 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Bill Meier wme...@newsguy.com wrote:
My inclination: test the return value of the various set*id calls and if
fail, do g_error().
Thoughts ?
I'd be tempted to make it a g_warning() since Wireshark will
*probably* keep
Should similar changes be made here as well?
capture_sync.c:1948:if (GetExitCodeProcess((HANDLE)
capture_opts-fork_child, childstatus)
tshark.c:1962:result1 =
GetExitCodeProcess((HANDLE)*(pipe_input_p-child_process),
- Chris
From:
I am creating a dissector that needs to be able to calculate the transmission
latency of a packet.
The protocol being dissected has the timestamp of the transmission, I need to
be able to gain access to the time of capture of wireshark in order to
calculate the difference. Anybody know an
Herb Falk herb@... Herb@... writes:
I am creating a dissector that needs to be able to calculate the transmission
latency of a packet.
The protocol being dissected has the timestamp of the “transmission”, I need
to be able to gain access to the time of capture of wireshark in order to
10 matches
Mail list logo
