Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Win64 build support
From: Brian Daniel <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:06:40 -0400
Thanks Gerald & Guy,
Since http://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/waterfall shows green & yellow on wireshark win32 I've been downloading the latest svn compiled wireshark win32 once or twice a day for a few days now and they all seem really stable so far and even seems to be stable on my Windows Vista 64-bit. My attempts to compile win32 and win64 myself crashed and burned again.
C:\wireshark>set WIRESHARK_TARGET_PLATFORM=win64
C:\wireshark>set PLATFORM=win64
C:\wireshark>nmake -f Makefile.nmake distclean
Microsoft (R) Program Maintenance Utility Version 9.00.30729.01
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.
        rm -rf wireshark-gtk2
'rm' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'rm' : return code '0x1'
I must be doing something really OS level dumb because, rm -rf (directory) is a linux command but I'm using XP Pro 32-bit to try and compile wireshark as win32 and win64.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Brian Daniel <[email protected]> wrote:
Cool thanks folks! Since http://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/waterfall shows failed on both wireshark win32 and win64, I'll hold off on my svn update until later tonight when both are green.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Gerald Combs <[email protected]> wrote:
You should now, along with updating SVN. I just checked in a change to use
WIRESHARK_TARGET_PLATFORM (note the fixed spelling) instead of PLATFORM.

Config.nmake sets CPU according to WIRESHARK_TARGET_PLATFORM. You shouldn't have
to set it yourself.

Brian Daniel wrote:
> Yep, turns out I need to keep my setting: Platform=BPC
> Should I use WIRESHRK_TARGET_PLATFORM=win64 ??
> For now, I'll try to temporarily change to Platform=win32 or win64 each
> time I launch the cmd.exe
> Also, what CPU= should I put for my Intel Core2 Quad Q6600?
> x86 is a solution for a very old Intel CPU.
> Many Thanks,
> Brian
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Guy Harris <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>     On Mar 10, 2009, at 5:08 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
>     > Should we use something more Wireshark-specific, e.g.
>     > instead?
>     That might work better.  When Googling for information about this I
>     found at least a couple of instances of some annoying bit of software
>     insisting on setting the PLATFORM environment variable to some silly
>     string such as BPC or HPC and breaking MSVC++ builds, so if we can
>     avoid depending on PLATFORM at all, that might at least keep us from
>     getting hosed by those programs.
>     ___________________________________________________________________________
>     Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>     Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>                 mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>?subject=unsubscribe
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe

Join us for Sharkfest’09  |  Stanford University, June 15 – 18
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
            mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe