I'm also confused here. Well, we need to distinguish 2 different cases:
1. you are really refering to hccap (without the x at the end)
2. you mean the new -m 22000 = WPA-PBKDF2-PMKID+EAPOL compared to hccapx
I'm pretty sure that for #1, the old hccap (without the x at the end) file format suppport was removed very long time ago (namely with this commit: https://github.com/hashcat/hashcat/commit/9aabc20 , year 2017, over 3 YEARS ago). With that specific commit in 2017 hashcat didn;'t allow the old hccap file format anymore.
for #2, you can still use both -m 22000 and -m 2500 in latest hashcat version (but it could also happen that it will be deprecated soon, since we now recommend the use of -m 22000 format as a replacement).
So yeah, Mem5 was spot on... but the "hccap" is a little bit confusing, since it was removed with hashcat v3.5.0 (and version 3.4.0 already added support for hccapx files: https://hashcat.net/forum/thread-6351.html , again ages ago)
1. you are really refering to hccap (without the x at the end)
2. you mean the new -m 22000 = WPA-PBKDF2-PMKID+EAPOL compared to hccapx
I'm pretty sure that for #1, the old hccap (without the x at the end) file format suppport was removed very long time ago (namely with this commit: https://github.com/hashcat/hashcat/commit/9aabc20 , year 2017, over 3 YEARS ago). With that specific commit in 2017 hashcat didn;'t allow the old hccap file format anymore.
for #2, you can still use both -m 22000 and -m 2500 in latest hashcat version (but it could also happen that it will be deprecated soon, since we now recommend the use of -m 22000 format as a replacement).
So yeah, Mem5 was spot on... but the "hccap" is a little bit confusing, since it was removed with hashcat v3.5.0 (and version 3.4.0 already added support for hccapx files: https://hashcat.net/forum/thread-6351.html , again ages ago)