On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alessio Bolognino wrote: >> On Mon 2008-06-02 11:54, Xavier wrote: >> >>> >From f5c5a277e2df14650ae441f32950aa6d4deee50f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: Xavier Chantry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 21:57:28 +0200 >>> Subject: [PATCH] makepkg : switch from getopt to getopts builtin >>> >>> getopt is an external script for parsing and is less portable than getopts >>> which is a bash builtin. >>> The main problem is that it only supports short opts, so long opts had to be >>> dropped. >>> The benefits are a much better portability and a simpler code for the >>> arguments parsing. >>> >> >> Maybe dropping all long options is not a great idea: makepkg has a lot >> of options and find an alphanumeric character for each is not that >> easy/intuitive; Furthermore getopt is ported virtually everywhere: Mac >> OS X, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD etc. and stuff like asciidoc >> depends upon it. >> >> > > Wasn't the whole point of this that getopt didn't work properly/as > expected on BSD? > >> Bear in mind I don't have a strong opinion about that, I was just >> playing devil's advocate :) >> > > Well, I am not a fan! Has anybody looked into parsing options > manually? I seem to recall Xavier point out a bash implementation that > could be used. makepkg does not have anything too complex (options take > one arg max) so it should be fairly easy. I'd much prefer a > parse_options function to be added than to lose all the long options. > However, if that proves too complex a solution, I will graciously accept > defeat...
I won't graciously accept it! :) I'd much rather keep longopts, so I think a parse_options() function that uses getopts in combo with some manual longopt parsing is our best bet. -Dan _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
