Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 11:56:17 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans), hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: getopt and EOF vs -1 Message-ID: <199703151856.LAA22515@rover.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 15 Mar 1997 11:33:27 MST." <199703151833.LAA04505@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199703151833.LAA04505@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199703151833.LAA04505@phaeton.artisoft.com> Terry Lambert writes: : [ ... -1 instead of manifest EOF, which is -1 ... ] : > There are about 331 possibilities. Do you really wish to fix them all? : > (y or n) :-) Hmmm, there are only 222 in my tree now, after eliminating the doc strings, and the irrelevant ones (that is ntp_getopt, or getopt_long). Also, there appears to be about 10 copies of getopt in the tree in various places :-(. One for patch, awk, ptx, cpio, diff, gcc, texinfo, etc, etc. There is also a libexec/mail.local/mail.local.c and a sendmail/contrib/src/mail.local/mail.local.c :-( I know this because both have this problem. : Sending patches to the vendors would be a good start. That sounds like an excellent plan. :-) Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703151856.LAA22515>