-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I know this might seem off topic,
but I have always found when stuck on win32 that the
packetyzer front end to the ethereal library served my purposes.
http://www.packetyzer.com
YMMV
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 01:10:07 -0800 Biot Olivier <Olivier.Biot@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>|From: Ulf Lamping
>|
>|Lars Roland wrote:
>|
>|> Patches are attached.
>|> Please check in, if you think this is a useful approach.
>|>
>|Someone on the list only wanted to have the GTK2 parts, as his
>>
>|customers
>|don't like the "old" GTK1 surface any longer. He can simply not
>define
>|the GTK1_DIR and will get what he wants.
>|
>|I like that idea. What do the others think?
>
>I propose to build *two* installers for Ethereal 0.10.1 on WinDoze:
>
> 1. a GTK1 build
>
> 2. a GTK2 build
>
>You then keep the installer's size at an acceptable level.
>
>BTW you can get rid of 10 MB per binary (ethereeal, tethereal and
>dftest) by
>stripping their symbol tables (at least, that's what I see on cygwin
>builds). I know you then don't get nice backtraces anymore, but
>I don't know
>if WinDoze users typically can generate those anyway.
>
>I don't know whether Gerald obtails download statistics for Ethereal,
> but if
>he does, he then knows what the end-users want. I guess most people
>will
>want the GTK2 build because it looks new :) This could then be a
>trigger for
>the developers to decide on maybe moving in a more radical way to
>GTK2,
>probably meaning that we have to create a suitable GTK2 model for
>the GTK2
>model-view-controller paradigm (but that's another story).
>
>Regards,
>
>Olivier
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ethereal-dev mailing list
>Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify
Version: Hush 2.3
wkYEARECAAYFAkArsz4ACgkQFh/Ot+gyoF7bjwCgg1X6wox1apjSS+mgzOK3Dl9uEowA
niJUmyd8PsPgt+jjpQh3b4ZnXC9J
=WRNZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
