Re: Conditional compiles

[Dario Lombardo <dario.lombardo.ml () gmail com>]

Agree. What was the original idea behind having pcap optional? I'm with
Guy: is that important to have a non-pcap version of wireshark? If someone
is able to clarify a scenario for that, can they share that?

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Roland Knall <rknall () gmail com> wrote:

> There is some misconception about the general approach with this idea.
> Whilst I applaud any attempt to reduce the number of defines, as it eases
> the implementation of new features (due to not stumbling over undetected
> #define issues), I strongly suggest taking a different route here.
>
> HAVE_LIBPCAP not only serves as a check for having libpcap in the first
> place, but also for changing the UI if it is not there. Which would mean,
> that putting a small non-functional header-only satisfying version within
> the repository would lead to versions of Wireshark being build, acting very
> differently then they are supposed to. For instance, remote capture
> capabilities are only enabled, if the corresponding function actually
> exists. Which leads to reduced code and binaries if the function does not.
> Now putting a small reduced function which only serves to satisfy some
> header functionality within the repository would bloat up the general
> binary.
>
> So in conclusion, I vote to not include non-functional code within the
> source-code just to satisfy #defines
>
> regards
> Roland
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Joerg Mayer <jmayer () loplof de> wrote:
> >
> > > To me it looks like HAVE_LIBPCAP would be a candidate to solve somehow,
> > as it is
> > > regularly involved when compiles break without this define. Would it
> > maybe make sense
> > > so include a dummy version inside Wireshark that basically does
> > (mostly) nothing?
> >
> > To what extent is it important that it be possible to build a version of
> > Wireshark without packet capture capabilities?
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > _______________
> > Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> > Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> > Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> >              mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscr
> > ibe
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> _______________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=
> unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe