[Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx>]

Loris Degioanni wrote:

> This shouldn't happen. However, there is a OID_GEN_SUPPORTED_LIST that
> you could perhaps use for this purpose.
>
Hmmm, I have used a different vendor dependant API some time ago (can't
remember which one exactly) and recognized that such lists tend to be
inaccurate. So I like to try it on my own...

>> Hmmm, we might sit down and have a beer together someday ...
>
> Where do you live? :-)

N�rnberg, Germany, and I guess you live somewhere in Northern Italy :-)

>> Do you have detailed information in which version the functions:
>> PacketOpenAdapter, PacketCloseAdapter and PacketRequest *are* available
>> in it's current form (e.g. parameters unchanged)? As far as I see it, at
>> least all current 3.x versions should work. What about the 2.x versions?
>
> From http://www.winpcap.org/misc/changelog.htm:
>
> Version 3.1 beta1, 3 feb 04.
> Changes/additions to the Packet.dll API:
>
>     * PacketOpenAdapter() now takes an ascii adapter rather than a
> UNICODE one. This is a consequence of the fact that
> PacketGetAdapterNames() returns ASCII strings: they can be immediately
> passed to PacketOpenAdapter(). (note: internal conversion is provided
> so that a UNICODE adapter name will be correctly opened, however the
> prototype changes and this could generate warning when compiling old
> applications).
>
> This means that versions before 3.1 beta1 will not be compatible.
>
> Packet.dll has a function called PacketGetVersion() that you can use
> to conditionally run your code.

Yes, I've implemented a call to PacketGetVersion() now and will warn
users that they may experience problems if using an unknown WinPcap version.

I tried Ethereal with some older WinPcap versions beginning with 2.3. It
seems to be working well with all those versions, however I don't know
exactly why, when I look at your change log ;-)

The situation as I can see it: Compiling with a recent WinPcap version
is ok, and running can be done even with an older WinPcap version as well.

Perfect for me as compiling Ethereal is far less done than using on
windows (a usual windows user won't compile Ethereal but simply install it).

Regards, ULFL