Huge thanks to our Platinum Members Endace and LiveAction,
and our Silver Member Veeam, for supporting the Wireshark Foundation and project.

Ethereal-users: [Ethereal-users] Run time problem with 10.11

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 This list is no longer active.

From: Chip Holloway <chollowa@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 13:23:12 -0400
Hi,

I've installed the 10.11 binaries on solaris 2.8 but get the following
message when I run ethereal:

** ERROR **: Duplicate protocol filter_name "fcs"! This might be caused
by an inappropriate plugin or a development error.
aborting...
Abort(coredump)


Backtrace:

#0  0xfe11f8d8 in _libc_kill () from /usr/lib/libc.so.1
#1  0xfe0b5944 in abort () from /usr/lib/libc.so.1
#2  0xfe3d8878 in g_logv (log_domain=0x0, log_level=G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR,
format=0x0, args1=0x6) at gmessages.c:389
#3  0xfe3d8910 in g_log (log_domain=0x0, log_level=G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR, 
    format=0xfeb90200 "Duplicate protocol filter_name \"%s\"! This might
be caused by an inappropriate plugin or a development error.") at
gmessages.c:406
#4  0xfe70fcd8 in proto_register_protocol (name=0xfec7c600 "FC Fabric
Configuration Server", short_name=0xfec7c5e8 "FC-FCS",
filter_name=0xfec76258 "fcs")
    at proto.c:2551
#5  0xfe8aad14 in proto_register_fcfcs () at packet-fcfcs.c:1148
#6  0xfeb855c4 in register_all_protocols () at register.c:185
#7  0xfe70b7dc in proto_init (plugin_dir=0xe39a8
"/usr/local/lib/ethereal/plugins/0.10.11",
register_all_protocols=0x14c3d0 <register_all_protocols>, 
    register_all_protocol_handoffs=0x14cf28
<register_all_protocol_handoffs>) at proto.c:303
#8  0xfe700dc0 in epan_init (plugin_dir=0xe39a8
"/usr/local/lib/ethereal/plugins/0.10.11",
register_all_protocols=0x14c3d0 <register_all_protocols>, 
    register_all_handoffs=0x14cf28 <register_all_protocol_handoffs>,
report_failure=0x2cacc <failure_alert_box>, 
    report_open_failure=0x2caec <open_failure_alert_box>,
report_read_failure=0x2cb14 <read_failure_alert_box>) at epan.c:64
#9  0x00048828 in main (argc=1, argv=0xffbeeb8c) at main.c:1691
(gdb) 


I didn't see any mention of this problem in the archive. Any ideas?

Thanks,

Chip