Please see https://gitlab.com/wireshark/wireshark/-/merge_requests/9688
I have yet to port my (genuinely) local block type, but would like to see
if this approach looks OK.
More thought might be needed to stay safe while dealing with block types
that don't have options.
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 11:
file-pcapng_darwin_process_event.c
I guess it's not as bad as the filenames with a "+" in the names, but would
file-darwin.c be enough?
On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:48 AM Martin Mathieson via Wireshark-dev <
wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> wrote:
> Please see https://gitlab.com/wireshark/wireshark/-/m
Yes, if there are likely no other similar types.
On Sat, 4 Feb 2023, 16:56 chuck c, wrote:
> file-pcapng_darwin_process_event.c
>
> I guess it's not as bad as the filenames with a "+" in the names, but
> would file-darwin.c be enough?
>
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:48 AM Martin Mathieson via Wire
Have changed the file name (compromise: file-pcapng-darwin.c).
There are some Darwin-related options for the Enhanced Packet Block type,
that I didn't try to move to file-pcapng-darwin.c. Is it likely to be
common for local packet block definitions to also have options for Enhanced
Packet Block (
