https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2803
--- Comment #7 from Frederic Leroy <fredo@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-24 11:06:49 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (From update of attachment 2600 [details])
> If and when c-ares 2.0 is released, wouldn't "(( ARES_VERSION_MAJOR >= 0 ) &&
> ( ARES_VERSION_MINOR < 5 ) )" match against it?
>
> I checked in a modified version of your patch, which uses "((
> ARES_VERSION_MAJOR <= 1 ) && ( ARES_VERSION_MINOR < 5 ) )" in r27112. Can you
> try it out?
>
Of course, my fault !
Even with that, it's not optimal, I think we wan't something like
( ( ARES_MAJOR_VERSION < 1 ) \
|| ( 1 == ARES_MAJOR_VERSION && ARES_MINOR_VERSION < 5 ) )
I will test both and tell you.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
