2015-08-31 21:07 GMT+02:00 Joerg Mayer <jma...@loplof.de>: > Hello Pascal, > > thanks for the quick response - solved my immediate problem ;-) > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 08:17:44AM +0200, Pascal Quantin wrote: > > 2015-08-31 5:34 GMT+02:00 Joerg Mayer <jma...@loplof.de>: > > > > > When using tshark from head I have a bunch of problems right now: > > > > > > 1) stderr is getting spammed with > > > (process:9870): Capture-WARNING **: Dissector stp incomplete in frame > > > 41915: undecoded byte number 57 (0x0030+9) > > > > > > > You seem to have activated the prefs.enable_incomplete_dissectors_check. > > Simply go to Preferences -> Protocols and uncheck "Look for incomplete > > dissectors". > > Yes, I do, but I really expected that to be (similar to) expert items, not > some "spam" taht (optically) interfers with the normal output of tshark. >
My understanding is that it is not intended to be activated by default, but only in "development mode" (at least according to the comments in the Gerrit patch if I remember correctly). > > > > 2) -T fields -e _ws.col.info isn't working (empty column), both with > and > > > without -V > > > The right field name is _ws.col.Info > > Sigh. Is _ws.* documented in one of the manpages? I couldn't find it. And > the > only mention I could find (the tshark manpage) used a small 'i'. > tshark.pod needs to be fixed, but tshark -h gives you _ws.col.Info. Could we plese agree to either *always* use small letters or to make the > filter names case insensitive? Also: > ========= > $ tshark -T fields -e asdf > ** (process:13516): WARNING **: 'asdf' isn't a valid field! > tshark: Some fields aren't valid > $ tshark -T fields -e _ws.col.info > Capturing on 'Wi-Fi' > ^C > 21 packets captured > jmayer@newegg:~/firmatmp/salalah/WIP/tests/radius$ tshark -T fields -e > _ws.col.asdf > Capturing on 'Wi-Fi' > ========= > Should we try for a bit more consistency here? > Right now it's the column title as you configured it. Maybe it should be made case insensitive, but there is a real logic (and not inconsistency). I do not ceck this code part and whether _ws.col.XXX could (should?) trigger an error if the syntax is wrong. > > Thanks again > Jörg > > -- > Joerg Mayer <jma...@loplof.de> > We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that > works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology. > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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-requ...@wireshark.org > ?subject=unsubscribe >
___________________________________________________________________________ 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-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
