🚀 go-pugleaf

Submitted-by: randall@Virginia.EDU (Randall Atkinson)

In article <1991May28.010441.13817@uunet.uu.net> ONM07%DMSWWU1A.BITNET@VM1.gatech.edu (Julian F. Reschke) writes:

>I recently heard that future POSIX standards will document `long options'
>similar to those used in the GNU file utilities.

  The above is the first I've heard of such a thing.  The most
recently reviewed drafts of POSIX.2 and POSIX.2a, which cover the
Shell & Utilities area, don't seem to mention any such things.  I
think that you can purchase these drafts, which are still in balloting
last I heard, from the IEEE Standards Office in New Jersey.

  I miss the snitch reports on what is going on and would welcome any
informative (as differentiated from speculative) commentary on the
future plans for the Shell & Utilities effort (or other related TCOS
efforts for that matter :-).

Randall Atkinson
randall@Virginia.EDU

Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 77

Submitted-by: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)

> I recently heard that future POSIX standards will document `long options'
> similar to those used in the GNU file utilities.

> (3) What about tools that do not use getopt (like pg, chmod, tar and so on)?

How does getopt support long options? I would think that standardising on long
options would pretty much require a more sophisticated parser, such as Eric
Allman's "parseargs".
-- 
Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180;
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012;         `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"

[ The GNU getopt supports long options, via +long_option_name, I believe.
  It qualifies as existing practice, I suppose. --mod ]

Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 78

Submitted-by: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)

In article <1991May28.010441.13817@uunet.uu.net> ONM07%DMSWWU1A.BITNET@VM1.gatech.edu (Julian F. Reschke) writes:

   I recently heard that future POSIX standards will document `long options'
   similar to those used in the GNU file utilities.

   (3) What about tools that do not use getopt (like pg, chmod, tar and so on)?

Note that GNU tar now uses getoldopt, which is called just like
getopt, but understands both the old tar option format and the new
format.  

	-mib


Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 79

Submitted-by: arnold%audiofax.com@mathcs.emory.edu (Arnold Robbins)

>In article <1991May28.010441.13817@uunet.uu.net> ONM07%DMSWWU1A.BITNET@VM1.gatech.edu (Julian F. Reschke) writes:
>>I recently heard that future POSIX standards will document `long options'
>>similar to those used in the GNU file utilities.

In article <1991May28.072936.26439@uunet.uu.net> randall@Virginia.EDU (Randall Atkinson) writes:
>  The above is the first I've heard of such a thing.  The most
>recently reviewed drafts of POSIX.2 and POSIX.2a, which cover the
>Shell & Utilities area, don't seem to mention any such things.

I can pretty safely say that .2 isn't doing anything like adding gnu-like
long options.  I doubt .2a is either.  The whole thrust of the POSIX effort
is (supposed to be) to standardize existing practice.  So far .1 and .2 have
done OK at it.  E.g., dd retains its current, er, *unusual* command line
syntax. :-)
-- 
Arnold Robbins				 AudioFAX, Inc. | Threads are the
2000 Powers Ferry Road, Suite 200 / Marietta, GA. 30067 | lack of an idea.
INTERNET: arnold@audiofax.com  Phone:   +1 404 618 4281 |     -- Rob Pike
UUCP:	  emory!audfax!arnold  Fax-box: +1 404 618 4581 |


Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 80