Hi,
Do we request a min version of libpcap in 3.0? I think this was discussed but
could not find the email(s)( quickly.
Regards
Anders
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list
Archives:https://www.wireshark.org/lists/
I don't hink we discussed something specific for libpcap, as it may have
been overshadowed by our npcap discussions of late.
I have no objections to increase the version. Going to 1.8.1 would require
some modifications or installations on nearly all Linux versions, My Mint
18.3 still comes with 1.
FYI: RHEL7 (7.2) ships with libpcap 1.5.3-8 and I’m told the latest RHEL7 (7.5)
ships with 1.5.3-11.
- Chris
From: Wireshark-dev [mailto:wireshark-dev-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of
Roland Knall
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 6:44 AM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [W
Hey - I was wanting to edit the wiki to upload some samples for a change to a
dissector that I'm adding. It looks like I used to be able to do that but now
the ability is done.
As per the instructions in https://wiki.wireshark.org/, can I request access?
My username is "ryandoyle"
Cheers,
Ryan
Den tors 26 apr. 2018 16:22Maynard, Chris
skrev:
> FYI: RHEL7 (7.2) ships with libpcap 1.5.3-8 and I’m told the latest RHEL7
> (7.5) ships with 1.5.3-11.
>
> - Chris
>
>
>
If I remember correctly the discussion was regarding some arkaic version
(0.9.x) used on SuSE 11. For which we did some chang
On Apr 26, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Anders Broman wrote:
> If I remember correctly the discussion was regarding some arkaic version
> (0.9.x) used on SuSE 11. For which we did some changes in autotools. Not sure
> if we do for cmake. Just thought we could request something with the same
> time line i
Den tors 26 apr. 2018 19:08Guy Harris skrev:
> On Apr 26, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Anders Broman wrote:
>
> > If I remember correctly the discussion was regarding some arkaic version
> (0.9.x) used on SuSE 11. For which we did some changes in autotools. Not
> sure if we do for cmake. Just thought we co
What about using proto_deregister_protocol? In your dissector (I guess it's
a plug in one) you first deregister the builtin one, then you register
yours with the same name. Would it work?
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 19:50 Roland Knall wrote:
> And I think this would be the case here, with new formats,
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:13 PM, Dario Lombardo wrote:
> What about using proto_deregister_protocol?
This function was designed to work with reloading Lua plugins and I
don't know how well it will work for disabling builtin dissectors.
--
Stig Bjørlykke
___
