ANNOUNCEMENT: Live Wireshark University & Allegro Packets online APAC Wireshark Training Session
July 17th, 2024 | 10:00am-11:55am SGT (UTC+8) | Online

Ethereal-users: Re: [Ethereal-users] Unable to start ethereal (pallette problem)

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

From: Gerald Combs <gerald@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 09:18:18 -0500 (CDT)
The problem is with GTK+, the toolkit we're using for both Unix and
Windows.  Please see

    http://www.ethereal.com/faq.html#q4.19

for details.

On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Tom Emerson wrote:

> I've know about ethereal for some time; used it on occaision; finally
> decided to load it up under windows and got what I believe is a rather
> pointless error -- no support for 256 colors!
> 
> Now, having used this in the past [and knowing it comes from a
> unix/terminal/non-gui background] I cannot fathom why the progran would need
> more than 16 colors, let alone 256!  [black & white for text, grey for
> backgrounds, and maybe half a dozen for "highlights"...]
> 
> It turns out that due to a bug I haven't bothered to track down, this
> particular system will NOT change the screen colors/resolution -- I'm stuck
> with 640x480x256.  Since all I use this system for is e-mail and terminal
> [telnet/ssh] access to other mainframes/hosts, I haven't had much need for
> anything beyond this, so as I said, I haven't bothered to "fix" this
> problem.
> 
> is there a compelling reason why the program requires more than 256 colors?
> I'll go out on a bit of a limb and guess it might be due to using a
> third-party gui library (qt?), in which case I'll retract any flame-like
> comments I might be thinking of at the moment.  OTOH, if it is sheer
> laziness on the part of the programmers, well, let's just say I can't think
> of an appropriate cutdown at the moment :)
> 
> Tom Emerson
> 
> diclaimers, etc.: please respond direct -- I haven't subscribed [already on
> too many other lists, this would be more clutter for just one answer] and I
> *DID* make a pass at the archives [only to find they are far from "easily
> searched" -- my eyes aren't what they used to be...]  If this HAS been
> addressed in the past, a direct link to the message/thread that answers this
> question would be appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-users mailing list
> Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users
> 
>