Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: [Ethereal-dev] Re: Building with gtk2 and packaging

["Greg Morris" <gmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>]

It is my opinion that on Win32 that we only build with GTK2 and the
modern installer. Since I have been building with this and distributing
it to my users, they would revolt if I sent them the old interface. In
most cases when a new update is released from the Ethereal website, I
will get several requests the next day for a new Win32 build with all
the new features. This would cleanup the make files quite a bit. I
understand that on other platforms this might not be an option but for
Windows users it is almost a must.

I build with all of the options and since the last CVS I performed on
1-26-04, all I can say is wow. The new features are excellent and under
GTK2 they just have the right look and feel for Windows. Especially now
that most of my users are getting exposure to Linux and Ximian it just
feels right.

But the make files are incredibly a problem for GTK2 builds. Every
time, I must hack around to get everything to work. This means fixing
the config.nmake, the Ethereal.nsi, and some of the associated plugin
makefiles. I have assumed that I was doing something wrong in my build
environment so I have bothered the mailing list with these issues.
Probably just an environment variable or something I don't have
configured correctly.

In any case, on Win32 with GTK2 performance is fine. Especially since
the updates made by Guy and a number of other contributors. The GUI is
usable and much more user friendly. I am really happy with the progress
made in the GUI over the last year. My internal battle is with users
that are tied to the old NAI Sniffer product. I have won over many users
but still have a few to go. The GUI changes are a positive move in the
right direction.

You may not agree with my opinion but don't ask me. Put up a build on
the Ethereal site of each and let the users decide.

My 2 cents,
Greg

>>> ulf.lamping@xxxxxx 1/30/2004 3:31:28 PM >>>
Anders Broman (TN/EAB) wrote:

>Hi,
>I thought I'd get your opinion/input first before sending to the list
if you don't mind.
>  
>
Why do you think, this shouldn't be on the list? Others might have good

ideas too ;-)

>1)I thought that the readme.win32 should be updated with stuff about
gtk2 see the diff file below -comments ?
>
>2) I struggled a bit to underrstand how to build the installer as all
this with makefile and such is new to me
>I included something about this to.
>Any comments on the text ? Is this worth to include ?
>
>Different topic slightly unrelatted: I built ethereal with both gtk+
and gtk2, and made an installers as well, all worked quite nicly.
> Then I installed them both as an experiment, as they install in the
same directory some files got overwritten which may cause problems.
>This made me think about how we could treate this and I see some
options:
> 1) As now - chose which packet to install.
> 2) 1 packet with ethereal.exe ande ethereal2.exe and you can choose
which verson to run.
>
>In my opinion 2 has some merrits as both versions have the same Glib
it would only be the gtk related *.dll's that differs, we could
actually
>release this version?
>
>Best regards
>Anders
> <<readme.diff>> 
>
>  
>
I was thinking about the same things too.

In the Readme.win32 we should add:

- an explanation, that there are two GTK versions around: 1 and 2 with

maybe some explanation about the differences
- an explanation, that GTK version 1 is currently the "main line" and 
version 2 is experimental
- the text from your diff about the zip files
- the text from your diff about the NSIS (it *is* worth to include)

As I'm working on some targets for Makefile.nmake which will make temp

dirs and copy the required files into it,
so we might not need the first part of your diff about the "common
files 
/ gnu".

Problems with 2) from above:
- the installer will be much bigger!
- when both versions are installed, how does the user start each 
version? Two icons, ...?

The size of the installer (even the recent version) could be hardly 
reduced, if we would put the dissections and alike in some DLL(s),
and have only the GUI code be seperate (for Ethereal1, Ethereal2, 
Tethereal).

Although this feature are frequently requested for other reasons too, 
this will be a lot of work I fear.

Regards, ULFL