"Yoshinori K. Okuji" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi,
> On Thursday 25 January 2007 12:25, Lubomir Kundrak wrote: >> I've noticed, that GRUB 2 uses argp in grub-emu [1], whereas other >> utilities use getopt_long [2]. Wouldn't it be nice to make this >> consistent? > > Maybe. > >> I find the "GNU way," argp, approach more elegant, as demonstrated by a >> patch to util/i386/pc/grub-mkimage.c. Seeing a patch with more minuses >> than pluses is a good sign, indeed. >> >> The main argument against agrp framework could be, that non-GNU C >> libraries do not contain with it. There's a standalone libargp package >> [3] that is available for package systems of all major operating >> systems, including NetBSD and FreeBSD, so the only disadvantage is >> addding a dependency there. > > I preferred that libargp would be included in our source tree so that it > would > be used when argp is not found in a system, but I guess Marco hasn't done it > yet. This depends on which is more convenient for users, using an external > shared library, or using our own. In GRUB Legacy, I included getopt for *BSD, > and I got positive answers. So I feel that it would be better to include. There is the library you mentioned and the argp implementation from gnulib. I personally prefer gnulib, because we don't have to worry about copyright at all in this case. But I agree, including it so things work on BSD is prefered. I assume you noticed grub-emu isn't compiled by default. It makes the situation a bit easier when using BSD. Although for a good port we need some argp implementation on BSD. -- Marco _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
