["Vinay Chilakamarri" <vinay.chilakamarri@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Jeff,

I could see the packets getting filtered in the display when I used the same set of arguments with 'tshark' . It's just that the wireshark didn't work with the same. I observed that "-R" is giving the expected output to the stdout when used with 'tshark', but it doesn't work with wireshark. 

The bug you've filed is seemingly related to writing the output to some file. But I wanted to start the wireshark with a display filter in place already. Let me know if I read your bug file correctly. I can file for a feature request if the one that you filed is different from what I was actually looking for.

Thanks,
Vinay

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There is this one which is about the same thing:

http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2234

Jaap Keuter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not sure there's one. You're welcome to open one. Mark it as enhancement,
> as all Wireshark improvements should be.
>
> Thanx,
> Jaap
>
> Jason wrote:
>> Vinay Chilakamarri wrote:
>>> Thanks Jaap. I am excited to know that my incorrect way of specifying data
>>> along with an argument that was intended to do something else gave rise to
>>> another feature that could potentially be added to Wireshark. Yeah it will
>>> definitely be nice to have one such argument for a command line based
>>> invocation of Wireshark.
>> What's the bug report for that?  I'd like to add what I have so far to it...
>>
>> thx,
>>
>> Jason.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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