Re: Thoughts on disabling an old dissector

[Christopher Maynard <Christopher.Maynard () gtech com>]

Evan Huus <eapache@...> writes:

> This was originally filed as bug 9569. The situation is sufficiently
> unusual that I really don't know what the best solution is, so I
> figured I'd ask for general comments from the list. The company who
> created and used the TPNCP protocol (and submitted the packet-tpncp.c
> dissector) wants to reuse that name for a new, different protocol and
> are asking us to disable the old dissector to avoid conflicts. The bug
> has more detail.
>
> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9569

I like Jörg's recommendation from
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9569#c3

Other than that (and other than what's already been suggested), the current
(now deprecated) one, could be renamed and then disabled by default, perhaps
the same way as the prp dissector does using a preference?

http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users/201311/msg00032.html

- Chris


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