Subject: Re: getopts....
From: "Gerrit P. Haase" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:30:30 +0200

David Starks-Browning schrieb am 2001-06-05, 10:39:

> On Tuesday 5 Jun 01, Gerrit P. Haase writes:
> > [email-masked] schrieb am 2001-06-05, 11:42:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > I have read the FAQ - is there any chance of getting a full "sh" that includes
> > 
> > Wow, isn't this in the FAQ?
> > 
> > > getopts and other useful scripting mechanisms?
> > 
> > Yes, but you need to build it for yourself.
> > Look at your favorite mirror for:
> > ftp://your.mirror.here/..../cygwin/latest/common/common-src.tar.gz
> > ftp://your.mirror.here/..../cygwin/latest/ash/ash-20010425-src.tar.gz
> > 
> > Unpack common in an empty dir, this will create a subdir 'src'.
> > 
> > $ cd src
> > 
> > unpack ash here.
> > modify: ash/builtins.def to include: getoptscmd 	getopts
> > instead of: getoptscmd -j	getopts
> > ...
> 
> That part is not in the FAQ.  I was not aware of this possibility.  Is
> it worth adding?

Hmmm, i found two three references to that at google, and right now,
after i'm missing getopts, the next one is asking. 

There is a general hint at the FAQ, 'why is this feature missing...',
in future there will be more and more interested people, was it the
german ct-magazin which wants to spread 400000 copies of cygin over 
europe? There will be some more newbies which know all the stuff from 
unixes and they will ask, 'why is my script not working as on my *ix-box'.

i think it would be not wrong to build this lonely feature (getopts) 
in ash back again, why not? Windows is boring slow all the time, so
it makes no big difference if it is in or not.

On the other hand, they may use bash instead of ash...

-gph

-- 
=^..^=

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple