[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ed package

matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au> writes:

>    > 
>    > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 utsl@quic.net wrote:
>    > 
>    > > getopt is in libiberty. It's also in glibc, and people have a bad
>    > > habit of not checking for that in configure. I'm thinking about
>    > > packaging libiberty, and
>    > 
>    > Also a BSD-licensed getopt (and getopt_long) is available in the NetBSD
>    > libc.
>    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.

Clearly it would be nice if they were compatible; OTOH persuading
either set of authors that they should use the other set's behaviour
sounds like a loosing battle to me.


"At least you know where you are with Microsoft."
"True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle."

Reply to: