Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 38350: /trunk/ /trunk/gtk/: capture_dlg.c capture_dlg.h

[Michael Tüxen <Michael.Tuexen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 8, 2011, at 9:07 PM, Guy Harris wrote:

> 
> On Aug 7, 2011, at 11:56 PM, Stig Bjørlykke wrote:
> 
>> Hmm, I have to rephrase this issue.  This is what I really wanted to say:
>> * The global "Capture all in promiscuous mode" can be checked even if
>> some interfaces have promiscuous mode turned off.  I think the global
>> checkbox should be turned off if some of the interfaces has
>> promiscuous mode turned off.
> 
> So what is the purpose of the global checkbox?  If it's to provide an easy way to say "I want all interfaces to be in promiscuous mode (whatever that might mean)", I'd say checking it should override the individual checkboxes, and force them all on; the question then is whether it should make them inactive, so you have to un-check "Capture all in promiscuous mode" to control the individual interfaces, or should leave them inactive, with un-checking any of them forcing "Capture all in promiscuous mode" off.  I would vote for the latter.
Hmm... Or having a button "Switch on promiscuous on all interfaces" and one for
"Switch off promiscuous on all interfaces"? Or just get rig of it, since we have the
preference?

Maybe less is better?

Best regards
Michael
> 
> (Should turning all interfaces' promiscuous mode on individually turn "Capture all in promiscuous mode" on?)
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>