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: <200401290732.i0T7Waqd024817@guild.plethora.net>
From: seebs AT plethora DOT net (Peter Seebach)
Reply-To: seebs AT plethora DOT net (Peter Seebach)
To: Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Question about ash and getopts
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 01 Jan 2004 13:52:40 EST." <6.0.1.1.0.20040101134614.037899e8@127.0.0.1>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 01:32:36 -0600
X-IsSubscribed: yes

In message <6 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20040101134614 DOT 037899e8 AT 127 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 1>, Larry Hall writes:
>I provided my suggestion, which Peter followed.  It's the ash maintainer 
>that has the final word on what, if anything, happens next and/or what
>the criteria should be.

Just a follow-up on this:  I'm doing an article on "portable scripting",
so if anything is happening, I'd like to know about it so I can tell people
whether or not this affects them.  Since getopts is portable to everything
else anyone's been able to name that shipped since 1990 or earlier, this
is gonna stick out like a sore thumb.

-s

--
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/