Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 18:46:28 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: ash missing 'getopts' builtin Message-ID: <20030519164628.GL19367@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20030519081134 DOT B19452 AT ns DOT helixdigital DOT com> <20030519152016 DOT GA29656 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20030519085741 DOT C19452 AT ns DOT helixdigital DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030519085741.C19452@ns.helixdigital.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 08:57:41AM -0700, Dario Alcocer wrote: > In fact, I'd say that getopts is almost necessary for scripting, > because its inclusion allows scripts to be on an equal footing with > compiled programs, in that both can accept command line options. This > means I can write small programs as shell scripts instead of as a > compiled program; this is entirely consistent with traditional Unix > programming philosophy, which encourages the use of shell scripts for > small programs. There is that problem left that getopts isn't quite "plain old sh". It's a System V extension while earlier version only had getopt (which is available as external command). Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/