It's interesting how little the core UI design has changed over the
years - the packet list, protocol tree and bytes view are all
basically the same as they are now.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
> For Monday's Sharkfest keynote I wanted to show everyone what things
> looke
On Jun 13, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Evan Huus wrote:
> It's interesting how little the core UI design has changed over the
> years - the packet list, protocol tree and bytes view are all
> basically the same as they are now.
99 44/100% of packet analyzers are using a UI derived from that of the origi
Speaking of Ethereal 0.2.0 ...
Recently I've noticed that some people, when they tweet about the project, are
still referring to it as, "Ethereal (also known as Wireshark)", and I was
wondering just how long it's going to take for them to start referring to it
as, "Wireshark (previously known a
Can you try loading an NFS trace on it?
I recall that in the old days, sniffers usually could not decode the
NFS replies since they did not keep enough state around between
request/response to identify what kind of response packet it was.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gerald Combs wrote:
I could try but I don't think it would show much. :)
$ ls packet-*.c
packet-arp.c packet-ip.c packet-tcp.c packet-udp.c
According to the old site archives NFS didn't show up until 0.7.8
(November 1999).
On 6/13/13 1:27 PM, ronnie sahlberg wrote:
> Can you try loading an NFS trace on it?
>
>
On 06/13/13 14:09, Gerald Combs wrote:
For Monday's Sharkfest keynote I wanted to show everyone what things
looked like back in the early days of the project. After doing
unspeakable things to a Red Hat 6.2 VM I managed to get a copy of
Ethereal 0.2.0 up and running. Screenshot attached.
You've
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
> On 06/13/13 14:09, Gerald Combs wrote:
>>
>> For Monday's Sharkfest keynote I wanted to show everyone what things
>> looked like back in the early days of the project. After doing
>> unspeakable things to a Red Hat 6.2 VM I managed to get a co
On Jun 13, 2013, at 1:55 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jeff Morriss
> wrote:
>
>> You've really gotta replace the window dressing (whatever you call that bar
>> with the X to close it) with a Motif one (or something like that)! :-)
>
> GTK and Compiz call them windo
On 6/13/13 1:52 PM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
> On 06/13/13 14:09, Gerald Combs wrote:
>> For Monday's Sharkfest keynote I wanted to show everyone what things
>> looked like back in the early days of the project. After doing
>> unspeakable things to a Red Hat 6.2 VM I managed to get a copy of
>> Ethereal
Heh, couldn't you try to install the Open Source version of CDE? Or is that
too retro/now ironically incompatible with such an old distribution?
Tyson.
2013/6/13 Gerald Combs
> On 6/13/13 1:52 PM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
> > On 06/13/13 14:09, Gerald Combs wrote:
> >> For Monday's Sharkfest keynot
Hi folks,
I found out today that the time from request field is named
differently for packet_smb.c and packet_smb2.c.
This seems like a bad idea. I like to have that column displayed
pretty much all the time, regardless of whether the capture contains
SMB1 or SMB2 traffic.
--
Regards,
Richard S
> I tried configuring XFree86 and then a bunch of unpleasant memories
> resurfaced and then I stopped.
Just install fvwm2 or ovm next to your current Window manager and run "X" from
a console window (the big black screen with "login: " at the top, switch back
to a new console, run "xterm" and g
Hi folks,
I thought I would try to work around my issue with smb.time vs
smb2.time by using a custom column field and putting in an expression,
but it seems not to work. An expression that is acceptable in the
Filter field is not acceptable in a custom column.
Why is this?
--
Regards,
Richard S
On Jun 13, 2013, at 5:16 PM, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> I thought I would try to work around my issue with smb.time vs
> smb2.time by using a custom column field and putting in an expression,
> but it seems not to work. An expression that is acceptable in the
> Filter field is not acceptable in a c
Thus wrote Edwin Groothuis (edwin.grooth...@riverbed.com):
> > I tried configuring XFree86 and then a bunch of unpleasant memories
> > resurfaced and then I stopped.
I'd say that has become simpler over the years. There's no need for
monitor modelines in xorg.conf anymore...
> Just install fvwm2
15 matches
Mail list logo
