Re: [Wireshark-dev] Bug 2066: GtkCombo: Conversion Status

2008-01-28 Thread Bill Meier
Bill Meier schrieb: I've been going through all the GtkCombo usages and understanding exactly how snip I'm leaning towards writing wrapper functions which provide the combo functionality required by Wireshark in terms of either GtkCombo or GtkComboBox. I haven't quite finished convincing

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Portig TShark from Red Hat to WRLinux problem

2008-01-28 Thread Sébastien Tandel
Hi, if you've downloaded the source form the SVN, you have first to do ./autogen.sh Regards, Sebastien Tandel On Jan 25, 2008 9:44 AM, Michal N. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I am going to port TShark from RedHat to Wind River Linux and I have problems. I need two kinds of paths for:

Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 2226] New: Mismatching /proto element in a PDML explort

2008-01-28 Thread Martin Mathieson
In order to conform to the schema, we'd need to insist that items were always added inside protocol trees, and not directly in to the top-level tree passed to dissectors. The TCP dissector writes unparsed data into the top-level tree. I know that I also added an ARP entry to the top-level tree

Re: [Wireshark-dev] ip.addr != 10.0.0.1 (Guy Harris)

2008-01-28 Thread John McDermott
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 05:01:01 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ip.addr == 1.2.3.4 means show me only packets where the address 1.2.3.4 appears in *some* IP header ip.addr != 1.2.3.4 means show me only packets where the address in some IP header is not 1.2.3.4 Is there any known case where

Re: [Wireshark-dev] ip.addr != 10.0.0.1 (Guy Harris)

2008-01-28 Thread Kenichi Okuyama
Dear John, Sorry to interrupt you. I simply want to make sure. You mean, in current implementation: a) ( ip.addr == 1.2.3.4 ) means (( ip.src == 1.2.3.4 )||( ip.dst == 1.2.3.4 )). b) ( ip.addr != 1.2.3.4 ) means (( ip.src != 1.2.3.4 )||( ip.dst != 1.2.3.4 )) which stands for !(( ip.src ==

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Bug 2066: GtkCombo: Conversion Status

2008-01-28 Thread Sake Blok
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 11:14:19AM -0500, Bill Meier wrote: Ulf Lamping wrote: This seems to be a bug in the GTK libraries, we should simply go back to the old GTK version that works and put some pressure on the GTK guys (the bug report seems to be written already). Bottom Line: I