Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil?
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 11:15:04 -0800
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
Current thread:
- Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil? Pascal Quantin (Nov 30)
- Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil? Pascal Quantin (Nov 30)
- Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil? Guy Harris (Nov 30)
- Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil? Pascal Quantin (Nov 30)
- Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil? Guy Harris (Nov 30)
- Re: Moving codecs to libwireshark or libwsutil? Pascal Quantin (Nov 30)