Re: [Wireshark-dev] When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS

2013-03-11 Thread Jaap Keuter
Hi, Well then you could say that it has sufficiently aged, so to speak :) Thanks, Jaap On 03/11/2013 02:35 PM, David Arnold wrote: > On 11/03/2013, at 2:18 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote: > > Hi Jaap, > >> I know it's a synonym, and I know the autotools guys push for it, and I'm >> all for it, but...

Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 48249: /trunk/doc/ /trunk/doc/: rawshark.pod tshark.pod wireshark.pod.template

2013-03-11 Thread Evan Huus
Good idea. Done in r48251, with a longer developer-friendly explanation in README.wmem. On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Jeff Morriss wrote: > morr...@wireshark.org wrote: >> >> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=48249 >> >> User: morriss >> Date: 2013/03/11 11:04 AM

Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 48249: /trunk/doc/ /trunk/doc/: rawshark.pod tshark.pod wireshark.pod.template

2013-03-11 Thread Jeff Morriss
morr...@wireshark.org wrote: http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=48249 User: morriss Date: 2013/03/11 11:04 AM Log: Followup to r48218: remove documentation of the WIRESHARK_DEBUG_USE_SLICES environment variable. Hi Evan, Could you document the remaining wmem e

Re: [Wireshark-dev] When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS

2013-03-11 Thread David Arnold
On 11/03/2013, at 2:18 PM, Jaap Keuter wrote: Hi Jaap, > I know it's a synonym, and I know the autotools guys push for it, and I'm all > for it, but... > We have to have an idea what we break, on any of the platforms Wirehark is > build for, if we do this. > So therefore my question how far bac

Re: [Wireshark-dev] When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS

2013-03-11 Thread Jaap Keuter
Hello David, I know it's a synonym, and I know the autotools guys push for it, and I'm all for it, but... We have to have an idea what we break, on any of the platforms Wirehark is build for, if we do this. So therefore my question how far back this symbiotic existence of INCLUDES and CPPFLAGS

Re: [Wireshark-dev] When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS

2013-03-11 Thread David Arnold
On 11/03/2013, at 8:10 AM, Jaap Keuter wrote: Hi Jaap, > ref bug 8452. > > When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS, which are now favorable over > INCLUDE? Do we break anything with this cleanup? (I submitted the bug) The automake documentation says: INCLUDES This does the same job

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Dissector question

2013-03-11 Thread David Arnold
On 10/03/2013, at 6:49 PM, mman...@netscape.net wrote: > I think you need a combination of a conversation and frame data. > > Only on the first pass (!pinfo->fd->flags->visited), create and track the > conversation. Also write the current sequence number to the frame data > (p_add_proto_data).

[Wireshark-dev] When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS

2013-03-11 Thread Jaap Keuter
Hi list, ref bug 8452. When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS, which are now favorable over INCLUDE? Do we break anything with this cleanup? Thanks, Jaap ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list Archives:http