Home page logo

wireshark logo Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: tshark -G fields2
From: Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 18:18:24 -0400

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Christopher Maynard
<Christopher.Maynard () gtech com> wrote:
Is there any reason to keep "-G fields2" since field 8 (blurb) is redundant
with field 6 (also blurb) and we have "-G fields3", which does not contain
any redundant information?

I propose either:
1) Eliminating the current "-G fields2", then renaming "-G fields3" to the
new "-G fields2" so that we would only have 2 reports, "-G fields" and "-G
fields2", or

2) Just adding the 2 extra fields from the current "-G fields3" report to
the "-G fields" report and eliminating both "-G fields2" and "-G fields3"

These are quite old (2004, 2005) and the original commits don't give
any indication why they weren't just added to "-G fields", but
presumably there was a reason. Gilbert was the original author,
perhaps he can shed some light.

If there isn't a strong reason to keep them as-is, I vote we merge
everything together into "-G fields".

Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]