Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil?

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Nov 30, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin () gmail com> wrote:


> Yes I should have been clearer in my initial description. 
> My suggestion with an extra parameter giving the hash table address is also working fine, so I do not have a strong 
> feeling either way (the changed parameter is faster to do but might not be the best long term solution).

Unless there's some compelling reason for them *not* to be in a dynamic library, I think making libcodec a dynamic 
library the best long-term solution.

> If possible I would like to have this fixed for Wireshark 2.0.1 but I wonder if such change is compatible with our 
> usual policy to keep APIs constant (does it apply when they are buggy?).

Making it a dynamic library wouldn't change the API.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe