From Danny Breton: Property name time-synchronization-interval(204) is incorrectly...

[obnox/wireshark/wip.git] / README.aix

diff --git a/README.aix b/README.aix
index afe1e5096d1853a10595b7b16f4b215de6431fee..9102b02ea34bb765899475c2bb7621d22957c20a 100644 (file)
--- a/README.aix
+++ b/README.aix
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-$Id: README.aix,v 1.5 2002/05/31 10:22:51 guy Exp $
+$Id$
 
 libpcap 0.7.1 and later appear to work on AIX when using AIX's native
 BPF; that appears to work better than DLPI does.  Note that you may have
@@ -6,6 +6,13 @@ to run AIX's tcpdump, as root, before configuring, building, and
 installing libpcap, in order to create the "/dev/bpf" devices and load
 the BPF driver.
 
+However, libpcap 0.7.1 doesn't work perfectly with AIX's BPF - it
+appears that AIX's BPF devices inform their user that packets were
+dropped since the last successful read by returning -1 and setting
+"errno" to EFAULT, which libpcap 0.7.1 treats as an error.  The current
+CVS version of libpcap ignores EFAULT on AIX; it appears that this fixes
+the problem.
+
 Some earlier notes: the notes about libpcap may not apply, with libpcap
 0.7.1, but they're preserved here for historical reasons.
 
@@ -276,7 +283,7 @@ The AIX documentation is not so well written.
 But basically, after I fixed up pcap-dlpi.c, I managed to get libpcap
 working under AIX.  This enabled me to successfully run Ethereal,
 ie. all the packets on my Ethernet network correctly showed up
-as Ethernet and not Token Ring in the Ethereal screen.
+as Ethernet and not Token Ring in the Wireshark screen.
 
 YAY!
 -- 
@@ -302,7 +309,7 @@ On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 11:50:23AM -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
 > > Any ideas why this causes trouble?
 > 
 > Mismatches between the layouts of data structures as declared in the
-> "gtk/gtk*.h" files in the Ethereal source tree and the layouts as
+> "gtk/gtk*.h" files in the Wireshark source tree and the layouts as
 > declared in the header files in the GTK+ source (either due to header
 > file differences - although the header files appear to be identical to
 > the GTK+ 1.2.6 ones - or due to compiler behavior differences)?