Should we update the release notes if the first field of a protocol filter changes?
In this particular example I've noticed two while looking at about 5 protocols
(pap -> prap, ntpptiv -> ntp.priv).
Ciao
Jörg
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 08:15:43PM -0700, bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2794
>
> Michael Mann <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Attachment #6362|review_for_checkin? |review_for_checkin-
> Flags| |
>
> --- Comment #32 from Michael Mann <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-07-21 20:15:42 PDT ---
> Comment on attachment 6362
> --> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=6362
> Fixing some more of the simpler "questionable" display filters
>
> checked in different version of a comparible path to revision 43907
>
> --
> Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are the assignee for the bug.
> You are watching all bug changes.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-bugs mailing list <wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-bugs
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-bugs
> mailto:wireshark-bugs-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
--
Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.