From owner-cvs-all  Thu Jun 24  0:41:57 1999
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.9])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A5A64151C2; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 00:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bde@godzilla.zeta.org.au)
Received: (from bde@localhost)
	by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA31133;
	Thu, 24 Jun 1999 17:41:43 +1000
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 17:41:43 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199906240741.RAA31133@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: imp@harmony.village.org, ken@plutotech.com
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/i4b/isdnd main.c src/usr.sbin/i4b/isdndebug main.c src/usr.sbin/i4b/isdndecode main.c src/usr.s
Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

>this to getopt usage.  The adding of '?' to usage strings in the past
>is something that Bruce has complained about, which is why I've added
>it to my list of things to filter on.  Changes like this have

I think I only complained about adding it to getopt() case statements.

>If posix allows it, I'd rather change getopt(3) to not complain about
>'?' being an illegal option when the option is '?'.  This would make
>all the programs consistant, and also make old programs which use '?'
>as an option

POSIX.2 seems to require printing a message to identify invalid option
characters (ones not in the optstring).

Bruce


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message