Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 3 Aug 2015 14:56:27 -0700
From:      Chris Stankevitz <chrisstankevitz@gmail.com>
To:        Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de>
Cc:        freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Getting value out of "man getopts"
Message-ID:  <CAPi0psuLRVi4umS2zCLfEHz-gzhkpEPq0mcR_kKKbGF975J7kA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <slrnmrvko7.2ht3.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>
References:  <CAPi0psusiWhyuG52jNRMgwShPuj0djMUb=nO6S=qG9V_9xc-RQ@mail.gmail.com> <slrnmrvko7.2ht3.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
> Further down, the "useless" builtin(1) man page says that getopts
> is only a builtin in sh(1) and not available in csh(1).

Christian: I apologize for using the term "useless" -- I should have
instead said "apparently useless to me but I am a dunce and I probably
don't get it hence I am making this post asking for help".  I tried to
communicate this in my OP by saying "at least it seems useless to me
but that's probably because I am a dunce."

All: thank for your help.  I now understand why "man getopts" and "man
csh" are not helpful in explaining getopts.  I see that "man sh" shows
some info about getopts.

I apologize to all I offended, particularly Sheldon Hearn, author of
"man builtin".

Chris



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPi0psuLRVi4umS2zCLfEHz-gzhkpEPq0mcR_kKKbGF975J7kA>