ethereal-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
"Lars Ruoff" wrote:
Ok.
But is there really a need for having a file number limit when not using
ring buffer??
I think so. This basically boils down to creating manageable files from
a single capture session without dropping packets or performing post
processing.
(as in Ulfs initial proposal)
This saves us another (possibly confusing) checkbox line and ensures that
never ever will someone get the surprise that its capture has been stopped
automatically
allthough he didnt set any limits in the "capture limits" section.
I think that this is getting into personal taste and which use cases are
the most common (which can change from user to user).
Forcing someone who doesn't want to use a ring buffer to enable ring
buffers, and then indicate elsewhere to stop before the ring buffer
would take effect seems to be non-intuitive. In addition, overwriting
captured data is another potential gotcha that some would want to "never
ever" happen.
How about:
O Limit capture to 2_____ files, and then
O Stop Capture
X Overwrite files (Ring Buffer)
In the above case, checking Stop Capture would uncheck Ring Buffer, and
vice versa.
Jason.
