[bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Christopher Maynard changed bug 12269

What	Removed	Added
Status	UNCONFIRMED	RESOLVED
Resolution	---	WONTFIX

Comment # 9 on bug 12269 from Christopher Maynard

(In reply to alex from comment #8)
> Sir, I got your point.

I don't think you do.

> In your perfect world Wireshark is the only debug tool in the Universe,
> everybody has Wireshark installed and know how to use it.

Aren't you the one using Wireshark?  When did I tell you that you must use it? 
I'm merely attempting to provide you with possible solutions to your problem
that you can implement today instead of waiting for someone to implement your
enhancement request, which I honestly don't see anyone ever doing.  Of course
this is an open source project and patches are welcome, so you are certainly
free to submit patches to implement it, in which case you can refer to
https://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/SubmittingPatches.

> I agree - it's really unreasonable to change anything and we should close
> this request. So please close it

"It's really unreasonable to change anything?"  I honestly don't know where you
are coming from here, but I will close this bug.  Feel free to reopen it when
you've submitted your patch to implement it.

> (In real life situation is a bit different.
> Developers doesn't have, 

I asked the question about whether developers could have Wireshark but just not
WinPcap/npcap.  You didn't answer the question, so for all I know that's a
potentially viable option for you.

> doesn't need Wireshark 

It would seem that they do need Wireshark or at least it's output, would it
not?  You are attempting to deliver that output to them as a screenshot, which
is not possible today, at least not without stitching multiple screenshots
together, which I imagine you are trying to avoid.  I proposed alternatives to
delivering them the output using methods that are available to you today.

> and doesn't know how to use it because they rely on application debug logs.

This is really simple to remedy though, isn't it?  Wireshark is not that hard
to learn.  Once they learn its value, they may stop relying so much on their
logs all the time.  But I suppose in their perfect world, application debug
logs are the only debug tool in the Universe and everybody should only use
that?

> When they want to show me something - they provide screenshot(sometimes
> text) of the log with remarks.
> Next, we connect to some external device, for example ATS.
> ATS engineer also doesn't use Wireshark, because he has internal ATS trace
> tool.
> If he need to prove me that our app sends wrong values - he doesn't send me
> the trace(because I don't have this trace tool and can't open it) but he
> sends me a screenshot from his tool with marked parameters.
> And only poor poor poor integration engineer with Wireshark is limited)

I'm obviously not familiar with your process flow, but somehow you've managed
to obtain a capture file and are analyzing it with Wireshark and you want to be
able to share results back with others, isn't that fair to say?  If you're
adamant that the method of sharing the information must be done via a
screenshot, then I think you'll likely have to implement that feature yourself.
 If you're willing to explore alternatives, then I've provided you with some. 
Others may have other ideas.

By the way, I have no idea what the "ATS Trace Tool" is, but if you can't
install and run that tool too, then perhaps it's possible for that tool to
export the trace into a format that Wireshark can read.  If that's not
possible, then maybe it's possible to enhance Wireshark to be able to read the
files which that tool does generate.  Wireshark has support for many file
formats besides just pcap.  That seems like a better way to share data between
tools than via screenshots.  Perhaps it's not possible though, I don't know.

---

      You are receiving this mail because:

• You are watching all bug changes.