Re: [Wireshark-dev] Npcap 0.03 call for test
2015-07-27 9:19 GMT+02:00 Yang Luo : > Hi list, > > Thanks for your tests for the first two versions of Npcap, I have fixed > several problems as following: > 1) Npcap causes BSoD if you uninstall Npcap when Npcap is still in use for > capturing packets. > 2) Npcap can't start the driver automatically when system reboots in 0.02, > now I have added this feature back. > 3) Npcap lose many packets for loopback capturing in 0.02, like TCP data > packets. Now I have fixed it and tested against TCP data transmission, UDP > data transmission and Apache HTTP server (XAMPP). > 4) "Npcap Loopback Adapter" can be successfully renamed in Win10. > 5) Npcap can see MB miniport adapter now. > > The latest Npcap installer is: > https://svn.nmap.org/nmap-exp/yang/NPcap-LWF/npcap-nmap-0.03.exe > > I have tested this version Npcap under Wireshark 1.12.6 x64, in Windows > 8.1 x64 and Windows 10 Insider Preview 10240 x64. > > Notice: > 1) You need to try it under Win7 and later, and no need to change the > installation options, just click the "Next"s. Npcap installed in "WinPcap > Compatible Mode" is exclusive with WinPcap, so you must uninstall WinPcap > first (installer will prompt you this). > 2) If you have installed WinPcap, better to reboot the PC after > uninstalling Winpcap and then install Npcap. > > The README is: > https://github.com/nmap/npcap > > > Cheers, > Yang > > Hi yang, like Tyson I experienced crashes when launching Wireshark v1.99.9rc0-29-g65a1f60 with Npcap 0.03 installed on Windows 7 x64 (did not face it on my Windows 10 x64 virtual machine). You will find 2 minidumps and a full memory dump here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2oz00ox20kv3oe0/AACFQC83vyKS2dY7bI7hnZBOa?dl=0 Cheers, Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list Archives:https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Gtk2 xor Gtk3
On Jul 29, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Bill Meier wrote: > Seen on gtk-l...@gnome.org > > From eba...@gmail.com > > > > Having said that, I must also warn you: do not try to support GTK+ 2 > and GTK+ 3 in the same code base. It was doable back when GTK+ 3 was > new, four years ago, but the code base, requirement, assumptions, and > API have been diverging to the point of being a massive waste of time > — for you, for packagers, for users, and for people answering your > questions. > > Either stick with GTK+ 2.24, or port to GTK+ 3. Or kick both of them to the curb, as we're doing in the trunk. :-) Of course, we're supporting both Qt 4 and Qt 5 in the Qt version; I'm not sure how much of a pain that will turn out to be, but I think the Qt folks aren't quite as eager to Change Stuff Incompatibly as are the GTK+ people. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list Archives:https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wireshark-dev] Gtk2 xor Gtk3
Seen on gtk-l...@gnome.org From eba...@gmail.com Having said that, I must also warn you: do not try to support GTK+ 2 and GTK+ 3 in the same code base. It was doable back when GTK+ 3 was new, four years ago, but the code base, requirement, assumptions, and API have been diverging to the point of being a massive waste of time — for you, for packagers, for users, and for people answering your questions. Either stick with GTK+ 2.24, or port to GTK+ 3. Ciao, Emmanuele. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list Archives:https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
