Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!news.gmi.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!uchinews!news From: Tim Pierce <twpierce@midway.uchicago.edu> Subject: is `getopt' legal under POSIX? X-Nntp-Posting-Host: bio-5.bsd.uchicago.edu Message-ID: <DGMCxM.3zo@midway.uchicago.edu> Sender: Tim Pierce <twpierce@mail.bsd.uchicago.edu> Organization: Direct Frontal Assaults on Bob Dornan Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 00:48:58 GMT Lines: 20 Let me try this one again. Apologies for any vaguenesses. In FreeBSD 2.0R, the man page for getopt(3) mentions some modifications made to the function for POSIX compliancy. However, the appropriate header file (I cannot remember which one offhand, and am not at home to check -- I believe it's stdlib.h) does not even declare `getopt' or `optarg' if _POSIX_SOURCE is defined! Why is this? Is it not legal to use `getopt' at all when striving for POSIX compliancy? I don't yet own the ORA 4.4BSD manuals (if I'm lucky, I'll get them for my birthday shortly :-)) and I don't have any POSIX documentation handy to see whether it says anything on the matter. I would appreciate hints from any folks more knowledgable than I. -- By sending unsolicited commercially-oriented e-mail to this address, the sender agrees to pay a $100 flat fee to the recipient for proofreading services.