[Martin Mathieson <martin.r.mathieson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I tried this under windows (where we are currently at GTK 2.24), and the code-path that cross_xor() tries to use does make a nice monochrome tartan effect :)

This 
http://lists.cairographics.org/archives/cairo/2008-October/015382.html  I think explains that that code-path won't work.

In this windows build, I forced it to use the #else path and it works fine under GTK 2.24.  What is the problem with always using this approach?

The other feature that Dana reported as broken in 1.8 - right-click + drag, also works fine for my under the current trunk windows build.

Martin

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Anders Broman <a.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Martin Mathieson skrev 2012-08-05 23:19:

Hi Anders, is it that xor just doesn't erase what it previously drew?

Yes I think so

My changes were about keeping track better of whether we have currently drawn - there were places where it was trying to delete or draw twice.

Do you see problems with the svn version now?

Yes, the patch I attached attempts to erase the line but unfortunately it also erases the graph, it also cased flicker.
 Perhaps it'll work slightly better with your fixes.

Martin

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Anders Broman <a.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Martin Mathieson skrev 2012-08-04 19:15:

Hi Anders,

Is that the patch you checked in?  The one problem I've been seeing is that it draws the cross twice when it is first toggled on - then erased when the mouse moved - leaving an unwanted cross...

The problem is that cross_draw() is being called both in toggle_crosshairs() and in callback_cross_on_off().  The fix would probably be to remove the first of those 2 calls.

This code is all a little fragile though - tempted to check in a sanity check in cross_draw() such as:

/* Shouldn't draw twice onto the same position if haven't erased in the

  meantime! */

if (g->cross.erase_needed && (g->cross.x == x) && (g->cross.y == y)) {

return;

}

If this is the same/only problem you were seeing, I will check in the first part (i.e. not calling cross_draw() twice), and possibly also the 2nd check (with an error printf() ?).

Hi,
The problem I've seeing is that in

static void cross_xor (struct graph *g, int x, int y)
{
#if GTK_CHECK_VERSION(2,22,0)

The cross is not erased and eventually the whole graph becomes black if the cursor is moved around...
Regards
Anders

Sorry Dana I haven't looked at the right-click and drag feature, I will if I find time.

Martin

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Anders Broman <anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

Something tlike this nearly works....

 

---

From: wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anders Broman
Sent: den 2 augusti 2012 00:06
To: Community support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] Right-button scrolling in TCP Graphs broken in 1.8.0?

Martin Mathieson skrev 2012-08-01 23:09:

There is a comment in the code to say that the crosshairs with the lines didn't work well with cairo.  The code is still there but things are currently configured to use the crosshair cursor instead.

I have reused the TCP graph code for another protocol recently, and plan to try enabling the line-drawing code to see if I can see what goes wrong.  An alternative might be a text control that gets updated with time+sequence number when the cursor moves.  Does anyone know what went wrong with the cross-hair lines, or on what platforms?

xor does not work with cairo so some completely different approach is needed.

Martin

On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Dana J. Dawson <Dana.Dawson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

So I'm guessing not many people use this feature (assuming it really is a feature).  I've also noticed that the crosshairs have become a small "+" symbol instead of the vertical and horizontal hairlines that extended all the way to both axes, which made it easier to determine the values of the associated coordinates for the crosshair location.  It would be nice if that old behavior returned as well.

Should I  be submitting a bug report/feature request for this stuff?

Thanks!

Dana

On Jul 5, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Dana J. Dawson <Dana.Dawson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I use the various TCP Graphs quite a bit and just noticed that scrolling a zoomed TCP Graph, such as a Time Sequence graph, by clicking and dragging with the right mouse button no longer seems to work with the new 1.8.0 version.  I've tried this both on Windows 7 and Mac OS X Lion and get the same behavior.  Falling back to 1.6.8 restores the feature.  I haven't found this panning feature documented in any of the Wireshark manuals, so maybe this is not a supported feature, but if it is expected to work it no longer seems to.
>
> Has anyone else encountered this yet?  I know I can use the arrow keys, but the resolution is a bit coarse via that method and it's much less convenient.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Dana

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe