You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to c-dev@xerces.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2003/04/04 00:16:06 UTC

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 18668] - runConfigure should look more extensively for getopt and fail more intelligently

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668

runConfigure should look more extensively for getopt and fail more intelligently





------- Additional Comments From tfo@netcentral.com  2003-04-03 22:16 -------
OK. After doing a bit more investigating, it seems that runConfigure is actually
breaking because of the syntax of getopts, the (ba)sh builtin:

getopts optstring name [args]

as opposed to the /bin/getopt syntax:

getopt optstring parameters

Thus, I was able to get runConfigure to work either by replacing 

runConfigure:131: getoptErr=`getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h `$*``

and

runConfigure:143: set -- `getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h `$*``

with 

runConfigure:131: getoptErr=`getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h foo `$*``

and

runConfigure:143: set -- `getopts p:c:x:dm:n:t:r:b:l:z:P:C:h foo `$*``

to comply with the name requirement for the builtin

or by replacing

runConfigure:128: if test -x /usr/bin/getopt; then

and

runConfigure:140: if test -x /usr/bin/getopt; then

with 

if test -x /bin/getopt; then


Now, I'm no (ba)sh hacker, so I'm not sure what something nicer than just
throwing "foo" into the call to getopts would look like, but I still maintain
that tightening up the getopt(s) sections would result in fewer headaches for
people using a variety of distributions. Certainly, the (ba)sh syntax ought to
be fixed, and it would be nice to have a check for /bin/getopt as well.

Maybe, too, an error about getopt failure rather than the generic usage error.

I'd submit a patch, but, as I said, someone with more experience shell scripting
would probably come up with something prettier than I would.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-c-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-c-dev-help@xml.apache.org