(I don't know who's on one of "ethereal-users" or "ethereal-dev" but not
on both, so I'm CCing both lists for this....)
> I was hoping that the proposal of going back to static width columns
> would die out after the messages reporting problems with the dynamic
> column code and the corrections were posted. However, it didn't, and
> we've now reverted to the static column width.
Yup. Resizing columns dynamically doesn't work very well with "-S"; at
least some people, it appears, do *NOT* want the sizes changing while
the capture is going on - Guy Swarc said, in the "ethereal-users"
thread:
> I still don't like the idea of resizing columns each time new records
> are read with -S. If I am trying to examine some of the packets
> captured so far without stopping the capture process, I don't want the
> screen flickering and changing on me. That makes it very hard to
> examine the data.
and Laurent Deniel agreed.
> I'd like to propose that we keep the ability to size the column based
> on the longest string within that column. This is VERY useful for long
> "Info" strings - what I had been doing before was just setting the
> display width to the maximum size of the character string (which is MUCH
> larger than the other columns (in my modified version, which nobody has
> expressed an interest in). It's very nice to have the horizontal scroll
> bar reflect the actual width of the window based on the data in the
> columns.
Yes, it's a pain that the fields other than "Info" are wider than they
need be, so that "Info" is narrower than it could be.
Unfortunately, it appears it's also a pain to have the fields changing
out from under somebody running a capture with "-S".
Laurent Deniel suggested, in the "ethereal-users" thread:
> Resizing on user actions is ok but auto-resizing while capturing with -S
> option without any user actions is a bit confusing. The only moment where
> it might be allowed to auto-resize is at the end of the capture session
> (when the user presses the stop button).
Would it be acceptable to all concerned to have the current static
widths be in effect as long as a "-S" capture is in progress, with the
columns resized as appropriate when the capture is stopped?
He also said:
> And auto-rezing while reading
> a captured file is not necessary (but the appropriate widths may be saved
> in order to resize at the end of file).
I assume by "auto-resizing while reading a captured file" he means
"changing the column sizes as each packet is read in" - I don't *think*
it was doing that when it auto-sized the columns; was it?
