Can we get a consensus on whether or not to make the change suggested in
bug #813 so we can close it out? :) I'm leaning toward making the
change, but that would mean also changing the display filter that people
are used to.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In a sample output from tethereal on a debian box which corresponds to
what I see in ethereal on my XP box. The frame size is properly labeled
in the first line of output. On line 6 of output the frame length is
improperly being labeled as Packet Length:. Obviously this is a trivial
issue, but since ethereal tries to be very strict in it's description of
a frame, it is clearly inaccurate to say a packet is the same thing as a
frame. Hope this isn't too annoying a thing to point out.
1 Frame 1 (60 bytes on wire, 60 bytes captured)
Arrival Time: Mar 13, 2006 14:59:10.977241000
Time delta from previous packet: 0.000000000 seconds
Time since reference or first frame: 0.000000000 seconds
Frame Number: 1
Packet Length: 60 bytes
Capture Length: 60 bytes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
