Re: [Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-14 Thread Joerg Mayer
Hello, On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:01:06AM +0100, Roland Knall wrote: > 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 >

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-14 Thread Dario Lombardo
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Jeff Morriss wrote: > I remember getting (infrequent) questions/requests for building Wireshark > without the ability to capture. Usually the desire seems to come from > corporate IT policies which don't want people capturing corporate

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-14 Thread Jeff Morriss
I remember getting (infrequent) questions/requests for building Wireshark without the ability to capture. Usually the desire seems to come from corporate IT policies which don't want people capturing corporate traffic but which need to support users' ability to analyze captures made elsewhere

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-14 Thread Dario Lombardo
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 wrote: > There is some

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-14 Thread Roland Knall
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

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-14 Thread Guy Harris
On Feb 13, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Joerg Mayer 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

[Wireshark-dev] Conditional compiles

2017-02-13 Thread Joerg Mayer
Hallo, inspired by the way too late demise of HAVE_LIBGCRPYT I've done a rough count of other variables. I include everything with 9+ occurrences below: 9 AIRPDCAP_DEBUG 9 DEBUG_FRAGMENTS 9 HAVE_IGE_MAC_INTEGRATION 9 HAVE_LIBCAP 9 WIMAX_16D_2004 10 ALG_USERETRY 10