This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Question about ash and getopts
At 02:54 PM 12/29/2003, Peter Seebach you wrote:
>In message <Pine.GSO.firstname.lastname@example.org>, Igor Pechtcha
>>I'm sure this discussion is in the archives somewhere.
>A first run of casual searching hasn't turned it up.
>However, since I happen to have an unmunged ash source around, I removed
>getopts from it.
># Without getopts
>$ ls -l obj/sh
>-rwxr-xr-x 1 seebs wheel 116024 Dec 29 12:50 obj/sh
># with getopts
>$ ls -l obj/sh
>-rwxr-xr-x 1 seebs wheel 116440 Dec 29 12:51 obj/sh
>Is this some kind of practical joke? The one thing I saw in the archive
>said that removing getopts saved 13k of space.
>To remove getopts, I removed:
> * getoptscmd
> * The reference to getoptscmd in builtin.def
> * getopts
> * getoptsreset
>The entirety of options.c only has about 3k of code in it at all.
>Admittedly, I did this compile on NetBSD, but the code in question is 100%
>portable, and the same everywhere. It sounds to me like someone trimmed a
>lot of things, without any attention at all to how large the individual things
>I don't think anyone can convince me that a 416-byte difference in code, or
>even twice that, is big enough to justify thumbing one's nose at POSIX.
OK, sounds to me like you've convinced yourself that ash should contain
getopts. Does that mean that you no longer have a need to keep this thread
going? I'm not sure I see the discussion providing any useful benefit beyond
you becoming more comfortable with your original position. If I'm wrong,
please show us where you're headed. If not and your main goal was to just
point out that ash doesn't have getopts, then let's end the thread. There's
little point to covering the same ground on this topic again.
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html