Merged #1392 into master.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1392#event-3892043957___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Since there's no further feedback...
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1392#issuecomment-711832987___
Rpm-maint
@pmatilai pushed 1 commit.
5125725009f5ad50adf5a574b9e9f2fac16af13b fixup! Wrap getopt() usage into
internal helper
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Oh, another good point. I probably had some vague idea about letting the
callback handle errors if it wants, but it wasn't all that carefully thought
out as you can see :sweat_smile:
I'll drop optopt from being passed, the current implementation doesn't need it
and this is a private helper
Btw, is there a need to pass optopt? It's usually used to print an error
message for unrecognized options, but in that case the callback is not called
anyway. (It *is* called if your option string starts with ':' and there is no
argument to an option that needs one, though.)
--
You are
Fixed to pass optopt around instead of opterr.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1392#issuecomment-708228238___
Yeah, thanks for spotting. Will fix.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1392#issuecomment-708172511___
Rpm-maint
I think you mean optopt instead of opterr, because opterr is for configuring
getopt()'s error handling.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
