Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:24:31 -0800
On Dec 16, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws () darkjames pl> wrote:
It'd be good to make them consistent, allow empty bytes (+1 from me)
+1 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
Current thread:
- FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Martin Kaiser (Dec 16)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Jakub Zawadzki (Dec 16)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Martin Kaiser (Dec 18)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Martin Kaiser (Dec 20)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Martin Kaiser (Dec 20)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Martin Kaiser (Dec 18)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Guy Harris (Dec 18)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Jakub Zawadzki (Dec 16)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Guy Harris (Dec 16)
- Re: FT_BYTES hf with len==0 Martin Kaiser (Dec 18)