Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] Wireshark cannot initiate
From: Alvin Jiang <macintoshyster@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:18:38 +0800
Hi Steve,

Thanks a lot for your kind help.
As you suggested, I just replaced libgcrypt-11.dll which was mentioned in bug #3270 (https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3270), then this problem got fixed :-)

P.S. I will follow your suggestion to post the topic on wireshark-users list later if more problems happens.

Best regards,
Alvin

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Stephen Fisher <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 21, 2010, at 7:35 AM, Alvin Jiang wrote:

> I've been using Wireshark/Ethereal on my laptop for over 2 years, it's a great tool for me.

Glad to hear it :)

> However, I found it cannot initiate today.
> When I try to run it, the initial GUI comes out, but the dissector registeringp process always shows 0%. Meanwhile, wireshark will take 100% CPU resource.
> So I tried to kill wireshark process via MS Windows Task Manager, strangely, this process cannot be killed, system prompt 'The operation could not be completed. Access is denied'.

> My Operating System is Windows 2000 SP4.

This sounds a lot like bug #3270 (https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3270), which affects Windows 2000 machines.

> And I'm just wondering if this problem has something to do with my installation of Symantec pcAnywhere today, because wireshark worked perfectly yesterday.

That's always possible, though I'm not positive if pcAnywhere conflicts or not.

> My question is: could I run wireshark in 'debug' mode to find where the problem is Or is there any logs I can refer to in order to resolve this problem?
> Any suggestion will be appreciated.

We do have a way to change the preferences file to show some debug info on the console, but it's not really geared toward problems like this.  We usually fire up a compiler's debugger to solve these problems :).

P.S. Please don't cross-post to wireshark-users and -dev.  A lot of us developers are on both lists.  This sort of problem is most appropriate for the -users list, and we can direct you take the discussion to the -dev list if necessary.


Steve
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
            mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe



--
Best regards,
Alvin Jiang