I wasnt trying to be accusing. :) BTW: forgot to run my spellchecker through the last post, me bad.
Hmmm then I ask.... What method is better? Changing cygwin... or changing pdksh....? The author of pdksh has already agreed to implement my work-around.... but this does'nt stop other applictions from having conflicts with non-standard headers. Side Note: Cygwin is great!! I love technology that allow you to have your proverbial cake, and eat it too. Keep up the good work :) -Nathan -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: which getopt.c is cygwin1.dll using? On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 05:26:24PM -0800, Downey, Nathan wrote: >Distantly related to this is a problem that I had recently. I wanted to >compile pdksh-5.2.14 for cygwin. The only problem I have was a namespace >conflict with getopt.h. Its seems that pdksh define a struct called "struct >option" in the source, this is also defined in getopt.h this wouldnt have >been a problem becuase pdksh doesnt use getopt for command line parsing, but >it does include <unistd.h>, after looking at the definition of <unistd.h> I >noticed that under cygwin <unistd.h> include <getopt.h>. According to the >POSIX spec <unistd.h> is not supposed to include <getopt.h>, as a work >around I redifed the local variable to "struct option_local"..... thought I >would bring it up hopefully a develope can comment on whey cygwin does this? The usual answer: Because we're mean. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
