On Sep 18, 2013, at 11:05 AM, Graham Bloice <graham.bloice@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 17 September 2013 22:51, Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> why not load directly the executable in Visual as described here: http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Tips ? It works pretty well and does not require an obsolete project file.
>
>
> Le 17/09/2013 23:45, mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx a écrit :
>> -1 from me. It's my debugger of choice. While an integrated solution would be better, I'm okay with the current project files. The default solution is nice to add the dissectors/files you're working on/consistently modify for quick reference. Outside of the debugger, I realize it is just a glorified text editor, but I'm okay with that.
>>
>
> The method Pascal describes is always the one I use if debug Wireshark using Visual Studio, although I normally prefer WinDbg. Having an out of date solution file doesn't seem to me to improve debugging in any way at all.
>
> If the CMake build on Windows stuff ever comes to fruition, then Visual Studio users will have a much easier task of building and modifying Wireshark in an environment they're used to, although any new files will have to be added to the CMakeLists.txt rather than the solutions\projects CMake produces.
>
> Personally I think that if the files are to remain, they should be maintained. If they aren't maintained they should go.
I agree.
Best regards
Michael
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
