Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <004f01c2c7ec$434b41d0$78d96f83@pomello>
From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb AT ukf DOT net>
Cc: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <E18e10C-0004Oj-00 AT smtp03 DOT mrf DOT mail DOT rcn DOT net>
Subject: Re: getopt_long behavior
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 23:15:07 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106

Chris Morgan wrote:
> I've never used a flavor of linux that didn't support
> arguments and options in arbitrary(within reason) order.  I
> think if you started forcing users to enter options in a
> strict order you would be met with considerable resistance as
> this restriction is unnecessary.  I'm not asking for every
> tool to accept arguments in different orders, I'm just asking
> ofr getopt_long() to accept reordering.  All apps that use
> getopt_long() will then support argument reordering to the
> extent that getopt_long() does, all of the tools I use on
> linux boxes do so, including gcc and linker tools, without any
> trouble at all.  This behavior actually used to be supported
> in cygwin but was changed, maybe a year or a year and a half
> ago.

On Mon Sep 24 22:49:12 2001 UTC (16 months ago), to be precise.

Hmm - with that info, I found a little bit of info on cyg-dev about why the
change was made. The problem essentially being with commands that take other
commands after them:

strace ls -l #oops, getopt makes this strace -l ls

It seems like you trade ease of use in some circumstances with difficulty in
others.

> I just wanted to bring the issue back up again to see if
> cygwin tools could be made to work like their linux/unix
> counterparts again.

I guess it all depends on which you aspire to be closer to, linux or POSIX.

Personally, I'd prefer it if Cygwin didn't enforce POSIXLY_CORRECT, and
people who wanted it could set it in their environment.

Max.


--
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/