Wireshark-bugs: [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 8494] wireshark 1.9.1 configure script should have a --wit
Comment # 10
on bug 8494
from Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
> > Please be VERY careful with this.
>
> I intend to be very careful by writing my own damn code to talk directly to
> netlink sockets and completely avoiding libhell^Wlibel^Wlibnl entirely.
> That has the advantages of
I completely agree with your choice. libnl has been difficult for lots of
projects with this crazy set of incompatible releases.
> I read the downstream bug - and commented on it - before adding my comments
> to this bug. I have *NO* idea why the Mac user was trying to build libnl -
> a pointless thing to do on any OS on which "uname -s | egrep Linux" doesn't
> print anything. I saw some references to "ebuild", and some Googling for
honestly I have no idea what the user is doing, it makes no sense to me either
so don't feel bad if you don't get it.
> The proper behavior here would be:
>
> if no option is given, check for libnl, and configure with it if present;
>
> if --with-libnl is given, check for libnl, and fail if not present;
>
> if --without-libnl is given, don't bother checking for libel, just
> configure without it.
Again, we agree here. There was no --with-libnl/--without-libnl option, now
there is so I am happy.
> However, given the version hell of libnl, perhaps --with-libnl should take
> an argument that lets you specify that a particular version of libnl should
> be used, with the default behavior being "use whichever version is the
> newest".
>
> (Either that, or have Wireshark talk directly to netlink sockets.)
Either of these choices are fine with me. Personally I like your idea of
talking directly to netlink sockets as libnl seems to be causing more pain than
good for most people lately.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.
