Re: [Wireshark-commits] rev 45189: /trunk/ /trunk/: cfile.h file.c

[Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws () darkjames pl>]

On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 07:55:51PM -0400, Evan Huus wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Jakub Zawadzki
> <darkjames-ws () darkjames pl> wrote:
> > +  if (cf->count < frames_count && framenum <= cf->count) {
> > +    /* XXX, what we should do when new frames were received during rescaning but user clicked abort?
> > +     *   - call packet_list_append() for all new frames?
> > +     *   - just warn user?
> > +     */
> > +  }
>
> Just looking at this for the first time, but shouldn't the first part
> of the conditional be "cf->count > frames_count"?

Yes, thanks.

> To answer the actual question though - I don't think we should do
> anything. Existing frames that we haven't processed yet are simply not
> displayed when the user hits abort, so I think it's perfectly sane for
> us to not display any new frames in that case either.

But if we don't call packet_list_append() on them, these packets won't
show up on packet list, even if user refilter again and this time he/she
won't abort the process.

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