Ethereal-users: RE: [Ethereal-users] Three big problems
Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.
From: "Mudium, Ravi Kumar (Ravi)" <mudium@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 16:46:48 +0530
Hi I have downloaded the ethereal and trying to compile . I have got the following error and I have not deleted the file.. ake[2]: Entering directory `/vobs/test/bcfsgn/tools/sw/ethereal-0.9.7' make[2]: *** No rule to make target `packet-bacapp.c', needed by `packet-bacapp.o'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/vobs/test/bcfsgn/tools/sw/ethereal-0.9.7' could you please help me in finding out the problem.. Regards Ravi Kumar -----Original Message----- From: Guy Harris [mailto:gharris@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 1:00 PM To: McNutt, Justin M. Cc: ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [Ethereal-users] Three big problems On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:12:46PM -0600, McNutt, Justin M. wrote: > 3) I need to be able to use at least 1000 files in the ring buffer > (although about 60,000 would be much better). The current ring buffer code keeps all the ring buffer files open, so the upper limit would be a limit on the number of files a process can keep open. I don't know what the highest value to which you can set the "maximum open files" limit is on a UNIX system, nor do I know what the limit is on Windows with various versions of MSVC++. I suspect it's less than 60,000; it might well be less than 1000 on some systems - and, even on systems where it's more than 1000, the limit on the number of open files that can be used with the "standard I/O library" routines (fopen, fclose, fwrite, fseek, and so on), those being the routines used to write to capture files, might be lower (for example, a hypothetical former telephone monopoly in a hypothetical large North American country might have used a single byte for the file descriptor number in the "FILE" data structure in their hypothetical implementation of UNIX, and might hypothetically have refused to increase it as said library might have exported the raw data structure and had macros defined in <stdio.h> that directly accessed it, and that hypothetical structure might have been laid out in such a fashion that changing the size of that field might have broken binary compatibility with programs linked with shared libraries, which they might hypothetically refused to allow in releases of their UNIX implementation, which we shall call, for the sake of argument, "System V"). > So what are the odds that a patch to remove the 10-file ring buffer > limit could be checked into a nightly build in the near future? A patch that raises the limit to 1000 or more on *all* platforms would be a substantial change, thanks to SV's annoying stdio limitations; the chances that it will be checked in are probably slim at best. Somebody might contribute a patch to remove the limit checking entirely (after having checked to make sure that if Ethereal runs into the limit because the user asked for too many ring buffer files, it reports it and cleans up properly). I don't know whether that will happen. (I won't be contributing one - I don't have enough time right now to do all the stuff on *my* TODO list for Ethereal, so I'm unlikely to add other people's items to it.) _______________________________________________ Ethereal-users mailing list Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users
- Prev by Date: Re: [Ethereal-users] Ethereal on W2K POS/ATM Captures (alternatively on Linux)
- Next by Date: [Ethereal-users] (no subject)
- Previous by thread: Re: [Ethereal-users] Three big problems
- Next by thread: RE: [Ethereal-users] Three big problems
- Index(es):