The Buildbot has detected a new failure of Windows-XP-x86 on Wireshark
(development).
Full details are available at:
http://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/builders/Windows-XP-x86/builds/5863
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/
Buildslave for this Build: windows-xp-x86
Build Reason
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:24 AM, didier wrote:
> I'll try to merge it with
> http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Optimization , this version is
> already able to find 2000 DNS packets inside 7 millions packets in 1
> second.
Amazing!
It looks that you've done several big modifications s
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 06:48:30PM -0400, Bill Meier wrote:
> > thanks for your reply, if I called directly from cygwin bash it's OK...
...
> > any other idea? Seems to be a problem of variables $... ?!
> >
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "a problem of variables $... ".
I didn't follow this t
Andreas Heise wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> thanks for your reply, if I called directly from cygwin bash it's OK...
>
> $ bash -o igncr
> $ grep '^register_tap_listener_[a-z_0-9A-Z]* *(' \tap-rtp.c 2>/dev/null | \
> > grep -v ';' | \
> > sed -e 's/(.*//'
> register_tap_listener_rtp_streams
> $
>
>
Hi,
Le dimanche 22 mars 2009 à 02:13 +0800, yami a écrit :
> Hi Didier,
>
> Thank you for trying the patch :) and all the good comments given.
>
> I've attached a new patch to the wiki. Please see my detailed reply
> below.
>
> - If compiled without NDEBUG defined I get a failed
1) I think it is. Within my proto_register_x2d routine, I call as follows to
register:
if (-1 == proto_x2d)
{
proto_x2d = proto_register_protocol ("X2D Protocol", "X2D",
"x2d");
}
Variable proto_x2d is a static int, initialized to -1. After the
proto_re
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 08:06:55PM +0100, Jakub Zawadzki wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:12:03AM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> > Warning: g_snprintf()'s function signature has an annoying botch in it
> > - the size argument is a gulong, not a gsize.
> >
> > Not a problem in the UN*X and Windows
Hi Bill,
Sorry, I read 2.16 as 2.1.6. Must be getting old :( I guess it is back to
the drawing-board for me then.
Thanks a lot for pointing it out anyway.
Regards,
Abhik.
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Bill Meier wrote:
> Bill Meier wrote:
> > Abhik Sarkar wrote:
> >> Ah, thanks Jeff; I und
yes, I always used make distclean before make all
regards,
Andreas
2009/3/22 Anders Broman
> Did you try distclean before building, if you downloaded a tar ball?
>
> Regards
>
> Anders
>
>
> --
>
> *Från:* wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org [mailto:
> wireshark-de
Hi Bill,
thanks for your reply, if I called directly from cygwin bash it's OK...
ahe...@83888ab05d01485 /cygdrive/c/wireshark
$ bash -o igncr
ahe...@83888ab05d01485 /cygdrive/c/wireshark
$ grep '^register_tap_listener_[a-z_0-9A-Z]* *(' \tap-rtp.c 2>/dev/null | \
> grep -v ';' | \
> sed -e 's/(.*
Hi,
Le dimanche 22 mars 2009 à 17:16 +0800, yami a écrit :
> I see. Thanks!
>
> Of course we can mark the excluded ones and save 'unmarked packets'
> for this scenario, however I feel 'saving unmarked' is not intuitive
> for end users.
>
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Stephen Fisher
> wrote:
Did you try distclean before building, if you downloaded a tar ball?
Regards
Anders
_
Från: wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org
[mailto:wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org] För Andreas Heise
Skickat: den 22 mars 2009 13:56
Till: wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
Ämne: [Wireshark-dev] compl
Andreas Heise wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I followed the developers guide to build wireshark from trunk rev 27814
> on WinXP.
>
> complie is running long time, so the basics should setup correctly, but
> then it
> fails during make of *tshark-tap-register.c*
>
> environment:
>
> WinXP SP3 32bit
Mark all packets doesn't necessarily mark all packets in the capture
file. It only marks all currently displayed packets, which could be any
subset depending on the display filter applied.
From: wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org
[mailto:wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of ya
When you have filtered frames using a display filter, "Mark All" will mark all
the displayed items. You can then use a different diplay filter to match some
other packets, mark them and so on. Then you can save all the marked frames
without having to use a super-complex display filter to match a
1) is proto_x2d well initialized ?
2) why use static for your variables ?
3) take the AMIN example and modify it step by step, you will find the
problem
4) I have no idea
Olivier
Dix, Steven E a écrit :
> I've been trying to get dissector plugin that I'm coding to display
> subtree information
Hi list,
I followed the developers guide to build wireshark from trunk rev 27814 on
WinXP.
complie is running long time, so the basics should setup correctly, but then
it
fails during make of *tshark-tap-register.c*
environment:
WinXP SP3 32bit
Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition
Python 2
I see. Thanks!
Of course we can mark the excluded ones and save 'unmarked packets' for this
scenario, however I feel 'saving unmarked' is not intuitive for end users.
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Stephen Fisher wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 03:08:05PM +0800, yami wrote:
>
> > I can not fi
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 03:08:05PM +0800, yami wrote:
> I can not figure out why marking all packets is a useful
> functionality. Could anyone kindly give some use cases?
You can mark all packets, then unmark certain ones before saving.
Steve
__
Another way to greatly speed up filtering would be to pick up and clomplete
the work to make it possible to use ep_* memory
for all field types when dissecting a packet.
When wireshark dissects a packet it performs a massive amount of
malloc()/free().
This was partially addressed when I added the
Hi dev,
I can not figure out why marking all packets is a useful functionality.
Could anyone kindly give some use cases?
Asking such a question is because marking all packets is really slow even if
the capture size is not that big.
If it is not that useful, or not widely used, perhaps we can giv
21 matches
Mail list logo
