Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/11/28/20:38:58
I wasnt trying to be accusing. :) BTW: forgot to run my spellchecker through
the last post, me bad.
Hmmm then I ask....
What method is better? Changing cygwin... or changing pdksh....?
The author of pdksh has already agreed to implement my work-around.... but
this does'nt stop other applictions from having conflicts with non-standard
headers.
Side Note: Cygwin is great!! I love technology that allow you to have your
proverbial cake, and eat it too. Keep up the good work :)
-Nathan
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:29 PM
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: which getopt.c is cygwin1.dll using?
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 05:26:24PM -0800, Downey, Nathan wrote:
>Distantly related to this is a problem that I had recently. I wanted to
>compile pdksh-5.2.14 for cygwin. The only problem I have was a namespace
>conflict with getopt.h. Its seems that pdksh define a struct called "struct
>option" in the source, this is also defined in getopt.h this wouldnt have
>been a problem becuase pdksh doesnt use getopt for command line parsing,
but
>it does include <unistd.h>, after looking at the definition of <unistd.h> I
>noticed that under cygwin <unistd.h> include <getopt.h>. According to the
>POSIX spec <unistd.h> is not supposed to include <getopt.h>, as a work
>around I redifed the local variable to "struct option_local"..... thought I
>would bring it up hopefully a develope can comment on whey cygwin does
this?
The usual answer: Because we're mean.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -