From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Mar 7 14:12:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (sri-gw.MT.net [206.127.105.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6145D14D6D; Sun, 7 Mar 1999 14:12:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA26095; Sun, 7 Mar 1999 15:11:56 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA27703; Sun, 7 Mar 1999 15:11:45 -0700 Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 15:11:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199903072211.PAA27703@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Bill Fumerola Cc: committers@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: getopt In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > We have a problem. > > 'getopt' is not included in the base tree (it's a GNU thing) and many > ports depend on it. There have been proposed solutions to fix this > (ports/8838), but none of them feel right to me. Huh? 'getopt' is part of base FreeBSD. 'man 3 getopt'. However, it doesn't support 'extended' capabilities like GNU getopt does. > Would the best solution be rolling a getopt library and then making it a > port? Should I proceed with this? Do all of these ports require the GNU version of it. > NOTE: I am not talking about /usr/src/usr.bin/getopt, I am talking about: > bash-2.01$ pwd ; ls getopt* > /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/diff > getopt.c getopt.h getopt1.c See above. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message