Re: [pacman-dev] [PATCH 1/5] pacman-conf: accept short options

On 02/08/18 at 10:49pm, i...@escondida.tk wrote: > From: Ivy Foster > > Also change '-?' no longer to be an error, because if we're going to > check for it anyway, why make it an error? Because '?' indicates an error.

Re: [pacman-dev] [PATCH 1/5] pacman-conf: accept short options

On 02/08/2018 11:49 PM, i...@escondida.tk wrote: > From: Ivy Foster > > Also change '-?' no longer to be an error, because if we're going to > check for it anyway, why make it an error? Hmm, why are we checking for it at all? I see no reason to treat it differently from any

[pacman-dev] [PATCH 1/5] pacman-conf: accept short options

From: Ivy Foster Also change '-?' no longer to be an error, because if we're going to check for it anyway, why make it an error? Signed-off-by: Ivy Foster --- src/pacman/pacman-conf.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git