‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, August 28, 2021 4:49 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Sat, 28 Aug 2021 15:26:28 +
> From:hancooper
>
> Message-ID:
>
>
>
> | Would the code break if I use shortopts="Vuhv:s" (allows getopts
> | to issue errors, not in s
Date:Sat, 28 Aug 2021 15:26:28 +
From:hancooper
Message-ID:
| Would the code break if I use shortopts="Vuhv:s" (allows getopts
| to issue errors, not in silent mode) but also have the (":") and
| ("?") checks inside the case statement?
Not break, but the
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, August 27, 2021 8:52 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:20:39 +
> From:nigelberlinguer
>
> Message-ID:
>
>
>
> | It should be noted though, that the POSIX requirement by "Guideline 7"
> | is not guided b
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, August 27, 2021 8:52 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:20:39 +
> From:nigelberlinguer
>
> Message-ID:
>
>
>
> | It should be noted though, that the POSIX requirement by "Guideline 7"
> | is not guided b
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, August 27, 2021 8:52 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:20:39 +
> From:nigelberlinguer
>
> Message-ID:
>
>
>
> | It should be noted though, that the POSIX requirement by "Guideline 7"
> | is not guided b
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 11:33 AM Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, at 1:20 PM, nigelberlinguer wrote:
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Friday, August 27, 2021 4:02 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> > > XBD 12.2 guideline 7 is:
> > >
> > > Guideline 7: Option-arguments should no
Date:Fri, 27 Aug 2021 17:20:39 +
From:nigelberlinguer
Message-ID:
| It should be noted though, that the POSIX requirement by "Guideline 7"
| is not guided by actual portability in the technical sense but by a
| rule written in the POSIX standard.
Those gu
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, at 1:20 PM, nigelberlinguer wrote:
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Friday, August 27, 2021 4:02 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> > XBD 12.2 guideline 7 is:
> >
> > Guideline 7: Option-arguments should not be optional.
> >
> > That is, if you want to be able to give an option a
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, August 27, 2021 4:02 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:05:52 +
> From:nigelberlinguer via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again
> SHell
>
> Message-ID:
> <0IgsinjPxg5VSubCxyc64u9axdDTEubUNcQFmIaPyduotl2C
Date:Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:05:52 +
From:nigelberlinguer via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
Message-ID:
<0IgsinjPxg5VSubCxyc64u9axdDTEubUNcQFmIaPyduotl2CyQ9g71uoLtpmXL2hUph1_eHzVRnEZ7vyyHFKqqy3OlPydQXccd2CkHyzpjA=@protonmail.com>
| I am trying to use
I am trying to use getopts so one of the options can use an optional argument.
Have seen many discussions online about using getopts to handle options with
optional arguments,
But also a lot of confusing arguments against many workarounds. Could bash
getopts have a natural
way to introduce an op
11 matches
Mail list logo
