Re: ed package

To: matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au>, debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: ed package
From: Andreas Krennmair <a.krennmair@aon.at>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:40:57 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20020204124057.GA1406@aon.at>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 13997.1012824820@eterna.com.au>
References: <[🔎] 5by9i9h47m.fsf@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <[🔎] 13997.1012824820@eterna.com.au>

* matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au> [02-02-04 13:36]:
>    But behaves differently to GNU getopt_long, as regards its handling of
>    the arguments '-' and '--'
> it does?  this sounds like a bug.  it should be compatible.
getopt_long is a GNUism, anyway. Only getopt is a standard (at least
according to getopt(3)).

Regards,
Andreas Krennmair
-- 
You don't win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making
the other son-of-a-bitch die for his. - General Patton

Attachment: pgp2gAaTuFD6s.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: ed package
  - From: utsl@quic.net

References:
- Re: ed package
  - From: Matthew Vernon <matthew@debian.org>
- re: ed package
  - From: matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au>

Prev by Date: re: ed package
Next by Date: Re: ed package
Previous by thread: re: ed package
Next by thread: Re: ed package
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread