[Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Kitty,

Well, it worked for me in 0.99.2 and 0.99.4 and it works for you in 
0.99.4.  I didn't see any changes in this area (in source control) 
between those two releases, so...

Anyway, glad it's working now.

Regards,
-Jeff

Janssens, Kitty wrote:
> Hello Jeff,
>
> We've just upgraded to version 0.99.4 and the problem is gone ! 
> Maybe something was wrong in 0.99.3a or maybe we made an error in making
> the package ??
>
> Regards,
> Kitty
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Morriss
> Sent: woensdag 6 december 2006 4:02
> To: Community support list for Wireshark
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] ring buffer ?
>
>
> Hi Kitty,
>
> Well, I was using Linux because that's what I have at home.  I tried on 
> Solaris (not that the OS should matter) using 0.99.2 today and it worked
>
> fine.  E.g., this command line:
>
> > wireshark -k -w /tmp/cap -b files:10 -b filesize:10 -i bge0
>
> created 10 files of size ~10kb.
>
> The only way I could get files of different sizes created was to add a 
> time limit to each file, e.g.:
>
> > wireshark -k -w /tmp/cap -b files:10 -b filesize:10000 -b duration:10
> -i bge0
>
> In this case Wireshark was creating files smaller than 10 Mb because the
>
> "duration" limit fired before the "filesize" limit did.
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure what could be wrong on your system...
>
> Regards,
> -Jeff
>
> Janssens, Kitty wrote:
> > By the way, if I use duration as stop condition (e.g. 10 files, switch
> > to the next one every minute) then it works. But when I add the "-b
> > files" option, it goes wrong.
> >  
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Janssens,
> > Kitty
> > Sent: donderdag 30 november 2006 14:20
> > To: Community support list for Wireshark
> > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] ring buffer ?
> >
> > Hello  Mr. Morriss,
> >
> > I've just tried capturing (without using a named pipe or any of my
> > software) directly on a link, by setting the multiple files option in
> > the "capture options" menu.
> > The result is the same : 1st file is OK, the next ones are 1 message
> > each.
> > Did you do your test on solaris ? Or doesn't that have any influence ?
> >
> > Kitty
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Morriss
> > Sent: dinsdag 28 november 2006 14:54
> > To: Community support list for Wireshark
> > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] ring buffer ?
> >
> > Janssens, Kitty wrote:
> > > I'm working with version 0.99.3a on Solaris (see version.txt).
> > >  
> > > I try to tell wireshark to work with a ring buffer, like this :
> > >  
> > > wireshark -k -w output -b files:10 -b filesize:10 -i 
> > > /PLAT/data/ss7monitoring/online/k5_0005.pipe -o 
> > > gui.window_title:"V1.0.60_ProfileID_5" --display=...
> > > But this doesn't seem to work. The first file is OK, but then 
> > > wireshark creates a lot of small files :
> > >  
> > > -rw-------   1 be083074 cc_users   10376 nov 23  2006 
> > > output_00001_20061123131915
> > > -rw-------   1 be083074 cc_users     110 nov 23  2006 
> > > output_00002_20061123131935
> > > -rw-------   1 be083074 cc_users     144 nov 23  2006 
> > > output_00003_20061123131935
> > > -rw-------   1 be083074 cc_users     110 nov 23  2006 
> > > output_00004_20061123131935
> > > -rw-------   1 be083074 cc_users     144 nov 23  2006 
> > > output_00005_20061123131935
> > > -rw-------   1 be083074 cc_users      24 nov 23  2006 
> > > output_00006_20061123131935
> > >
> > >  
> > > I found Bug 895 that seems to describe this problem, but it also says
>
> > > that this is solved in version 0.99.2.
> > >  
> > > Am I doing something wrong or is this bug not fixed in the version I 
> > > use ??
> > As you noted, that bug should have been fixed already.
> >
> > I just tried the current SVN version and didn't see the problem: each 
> > output file is about 10k.  I don't think anything has changed in this 
> > area between 0.99.3 and the current SVN version so I can't explain the
>
> > behavior you're seeing.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-users mailing list
> Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-users mailing list
> Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users