DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668 runConfigure should look more extensively for getopt and fail more intelligently ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-04-03 22:16 ------- OK. After doing a bit more investigating, it seems that runConfigure is actually breaking because of the syntax of getopts, the (ba)sh builtin: getopts optstring name [args] as opposed to the /bin/getopt syntax: getopt optstring parameters Thus, I was able to get runConfigure to work either by replacing runConfigure:131: getoptErr=`getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h `$*`` and runConfigure:143: set -- `getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h `$*`` with runConfigure:131: getoptErr=`getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h foo `$*`` and runConfigure:143: set -- `getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h foo `$*`` to comply with the name requirement for the builtin or by replacing runConfigure:128: if test -x /usr/bin/getopt; then and runConfigure:140: if test -x /usr/bin/getopt; then with if test -x /bin/getopt; then Now, I'm no (ba)sh hacker, so I'm not sure what something nicer than just throwing "foo" into the call to getopts would look like, but I still maintain that tightening up the getopt(s) sections would result in fewer headaches for people using a variety of distributions. Certainly, the (ba)sh syntax ought to be fixed, and it would be nice to have a check for /bin/getopt as well. Maybe, too, an error about getopt failure rather than the generic usage error. I'd submit a patch, but, as I said, someone with more experience shell scripting would probably come up with something prettier than I would. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
