Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Still compile problems with capture_dlg.c
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 19:39:57 +0200
On Aug 6, 2011, at 5:42 PM, Joerg Mayer wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 02:42:00PM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>> No, not a bug in the compiler, a bug in the code. I checked in a fix in
>> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=38375
> 
> Thanks, it is gone now.
> 
>>> /home/jmayer/work/wireshark/svn/trunk/gtk/capture_dlg.c: At top level:
>>> /home/jmayer/work/wireshark/svn/trunk/gtk/capture_dlg.c:527:1: error: ‘iftype_combo_box_add’ defined but not used
>>> /home/jmayer/work/wireshark/svn/trunk/gtk/capture_dlg.c:600:1: error: ‘iftype_combo_box_new’ defined but not used
>>> /home/jmayer/work/wireshark/svn/trunk/gtk/capture_dlg.c:629:1: error: ‘iftype_combo_is_separator’ defined but not used
>>> make[2]: *** [gtk/CMakeFiles/ui.dir/capture_dlg.c.o] Error 1
>> I checked in a fix for these warnings in
>> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=38376
>> 
>> Please let me know if it now compiled on your configuration.
> 
> Of course not ;-) because now others are unused. If you think that removing that
> code (well, #if 0'ing) is the right way I will do that for the code until it
> compiles (will take 2-4 additional iterations, forgot how many but I did this
> locally earlier and thought that removing so much code couldn't be intentional :)
> I've committed revision 38379 which surrounds all the possibly unused code by
> #ifdef HAVE_PCAP_REMOTE_NEVERTRUE/#endif (all the code was previously
> #ifdef HAVE_PCAP_REMOTE/#endif).
Hi Joerg,

from what I could see is that the functions (I #if 0 out) are never called.
I just wanted to keep the code if it turns out that it is needed when
Irene is working on implementing the suggestions.
I've put an item on our ToDo list to finally cleanup the source code.
I'm wondering why our compilers did not complain...

Best regards
Michael
> 
> Ciao
>      Joerg
> 
> -- 
> Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
> We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
> works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe