I find really a pain when browsing the "Packet List" pane the indication of the current selected packet. It is not really contrasting and it completely disappears when I click on the "Packet detail" pane. This makes virtually impossible going back to the "Packet List" pane over the same packet I was just analyzing in detail. Is there a way to solve this? what am I doing wrong? Having an "*" indicating the currently selected "Packet List" row would be awesome, I understand colors are required for packet analysis but not having a clear indication of the selected packet is very frustrating.... Please let me know Thanks for an awesome product. asked 24 Oct '13, 05:38  patpat |
2 Answers:
If you are in the That's how I 'solve' this problem for me, until there is a better solution :-) Regards answered 28 Oct '13, 09:37  Kurt Knochner ♦ far from good but better than nothing; I'll take it; thanks a lot. (28 Oct '13, 14:41) patpat |
No, you're not the only one dealing with this, but that's just the way Wireshark works right now. See Bug 9285 at the Wireshark Bugzilla for one enhancement request suggesting an alternate way to indicate the selected packet. Feel free to add a comment to that request or to add a different enhancement request if you think it should be done differently. In the meantime, as far as finding your way back to the selected packet in the Packet List pane, simply pay attention to the Frame number, which is shown on the first line in the Packet Details pane. answered 25 Oct '13, 11:36  Jim Aragon See also bug 3944? Note that the only real question that matters today is, "How does it look with Qt?" (25 Oct '13, 12:37) cmaynard ♦♦ Thanks for the answer; looking at the Frame number is not really practical when the number gets big. I think that making the selected line text bold (or just the Frame # field) on a QT ListView could be easily done and solves the problem. What do you guys think? (26 Oct '13, 03:26) patpat I just read the Bug 9285 provided link and says "Bold" as I've said before; sorry. I agree with that idea then. (26 Oct '13, 03:27) patpat |
I cannot believe I'm the only one dealing with this... :-(