> As far as I can tell the only thing gained from using getopt is handling
> vipw --
> as vipw takes no flags or arguments, is not intended for non-interactive
> use, and is not POSIX, I don't see a reason -- should be handled. If
> anyone prefers proper handling of -- perhaps
> if (!( argc == 1 || (argc == 2 && strcmp(argv[1], "--") == 0)))
I disgree strongly, and am glad others dropped your patch. "--" handling
should never be written by hand.
>
> Also kill a needless include.
>
> - Matthew Martin
>
> diff --git vipw.c vipw.c
> index e9595b02198..88a741f1c15 100644
> --- vipw.c
> +++ vipw.c
> @@ -37,7 +37,6 @@
> #include <pwd.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> -#include <string.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <util.h>
>
> @@ -49,18 +48,8 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> int pfd, tfd;
> struct stat begin, end;
> - int ch;
>
> - while ((ch = getopt(argc, argv, "")) != -1) {
> - switch (ch) {
> - default:
> - usage();
> - }
> - }
> - argc -= optind;
> - argv += optind;
> -
> - if (argc != 0)
> + if (argc != 1)
> usage();
>
> if (pledge("stdio rpath wpath cpath fattr proc exec", NULL) == -1)
>
