> I've pushed your original patch (with some comment-tweaking).
> It seems unlikely to break anything.
Thanks!
dated
attached patch ensure we start with an empty optopt.
>From ba0b331e67db4eb1a66ee7a1445a536f9788f0ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Quentin Rameau
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 20:45:29 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix handling of ? option
Using optind to check back the original given option th
l
> still does.
Another better way, I think, to fix this is to check for optopt
instead, which would be set to the option which caused the error, which
if empty means there isn't an error.
Patch attached.
>From 8aaec7d151567385c43d8966f46f0e5e4837c93c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Quentin Rameau
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019
> > Um ... so how would control get there with optind too large?
Sorry, I missed the simple explanation for that:
As option 'h' is missing an argument, getopt(_long) returns the
character '?' which is switched on through variable c, and the program
jumps to the '?' case handling.
Hello Tom,
> > When passing an argument option with a missing argument, strcmp
> > would be called with the argv terminating NULL.
>
> Um ... so how would control get there with optind too large?
That's from the getopt specification[0]:
“If the option was the last character in the string poin
When passing an argument option with a missing argument, strcmp would
be called with the argv terminating NULL.
---
src/bin/psql/startup.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/bin/psql/startup.c b/src/bin/psql/startup.c
index 4730c73396..cffbfc864e 100644
--
