Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Capturing from multiple interfaces, and why we need this.

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

Date Index Thread Index Other Months All Mailing Lists
Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next
From: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 12:01:31 -0800
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 01:59:43AM +0100, Joerg Mayer wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 04:24:55PM -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
> > One disadvantage of that solution is, of course, that you'd only be able
> > to use it with versions of libpcap that support that split of parsing
> > and code generation.
> 
> Actually, I'd prefer to just take the code and put it into wiretap, just
> as we are providing our own versions of vsnprintf etc in case they are
> missing.

That's not the same - we provide "snprintf()" etc. only to allow us to
use them on systems that lack them, not to provide an "snprintf()" that
has a particular minimum set of features.

If we make our own copy of libpcap:

	When would we update it?  When a new libpcap release comes out?
	Whenever anything's checked into libpcap CVS?  Whenever anything
	interesting is checked into libpcap CVS?  Etc..

	What about WinPcap, which includes more stuff than just libpcap
	- it includes drivers and a low-level library that's used by the
	libpcap portion?

	Would developers understand that

		1) It's BSD-licensed, not GPLed, and all changes to our
		   copy will be BSD-licensed?

		2) Any improvements we make *WILL* be propagated to
		   tcpdump.org's libpcap?