From: D M G. <dm...@uv...> - 2009-10-01 17:07:41
|
Hi Everybody, I am going to start adding command line options, and I think libopt is the best library for the job. Of course, command line options is something the windows people are not used to, so we might just "ifdef" them out. At the beginning this has the potential to break the build. So I'll enable command line options via ifdefs, and update the autoconf scripts accordingly. --dmg -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . |
From: Bruno P. <br...@po...> - 2009-10-01 19:37:36
|
On Thu 01-Oct-2009 at 10:07 -0700, Daniel M. German wrote: > >I am going to start adding command line options, and I think libopt is >the best library for the job. Don't you mean popt? libopt is really obscure and not even found on any Linux distributions as far as I can tell. -- Bruno |
From: D M G. <dm...@uv...> - 2009-10-01 20:19:28
|
Bruno> Don't you mean popt? libopt is really obscure and not even found on Bruno> any Linux distributions as far as I can tell. Libopt supports ~/.<config> files, which is a nice addition, other than that libopt and popt are sort of equivalent. libopt It is currently available in debian (and ubuntu) and FreeBSD ports. But not in fedora11. With respect to Erik comment, I'll meant to say that the new handling will be optional in windows, while the "old" one will be available still under windows. This way I don't break the windows port. -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . |
From: Bruno P. <br...@po...> - 2009-10-01 21:13:07
|
On Thu 01-Oct-2009 at 13:19 -0700, Daniel M. German wrote: > > Bruno> Don't you mean popt? libopt is really obscure and not even found on > Bruno> any Linux distributions as far as I can tell. > >Libopt supports ~/.<config> files, which is a nice addition, other than >that libopt and popt are sort of equivalent. libopt has been abandoned, there has been no activity in seven years. There is an actively developed libopt which is something else altogether: http://www-rocq.inria.fr/~gilbert/modulopt/libopt/libopt.html There are no released files in the download area, if I want a tarball I have to download from CVS: http://www.rx3.org/dvp/download/libopt/ There is no license, the Makefile doesn't support any compiler options and will need to be rewritten. This thing is unpackageable, I don't know how it got into debian but it certainly won't be accepted into fedora. >libopt It is currently available in debian (and ubuntu) and FreeBSD >ports. But not in fedora11. -- Bruno |
From: Thomas S. <tks...@gm...> - 2009-10-02 00:08:04
|
My 2 cents I'm against obscure (or even non-obscure) command line parsing packages. What's wrong with just writing the code yourself? It's probably not as hard as figuring out how to use some tricky package, and plain code is much easier to understand and port. You do want to suport Unicode file names, so you have to use a Unicode string library. But that's all. Regards, Tom On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Bruno Postle <br...@po...> wrote: > On Thu 01-Oct-2009 at 13:19 -0700, Daniel M. German wrote: > > > > Bruno> Don't you mean popt? libopt is really obscure and not even found > on > > Bruno> any Linux distributions as far as I can tell. > > > >Libopt supports ~/.<config> files, which is a nice addition, other than > >that libopt and popt are sort of equivalent. > > libopt has been abandoned, there has been no activity in seven > years. There is an actively developed libopt which is something > else altogether: > http://www-rocq.inria.fr/~gilbert/modulopt/libopt/libopt.html<http://www-rocq.inria.fr/%7Egilbert/modulopt/libopt/libopt.html> > > There are no released files in the download area, if I want a > tarball I have to download from CVS: > http://www.rx3.org/dvp/download/libopt/ > > There is no license, the Makefile doesn't support any compiler > options and will need to be rewritten. This thing is unpackageable, > I don't know how it got into debian but it certainly won't be > accepted into fedora. > > >libopt It is currently available in debian (and ubuntu) and FreeBSD > >ports. But not in fedora11. > > -- > Bruno > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > _______________________________________________ > PanoTools-devel mailing list > Pan...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/panotools-devel > |
From: D M G. <dm...@uv...> - 2009-10-05 06:51:11
|
Thomas> My 2 cents Thomas> I'm against obscure (or even non-obscure) command line parsing Thomas> packages. What's wrong with just writing the code yourself? Thomas> It's probably not as hard as figuring out how to use some Thomas> tricky package, and plain code is much easier to understand and Thomas> port. Reason 1. I am lazy. Why rewrite what somebody else has done already. Reason 2. Libraries are significantly more reliable than new code. Reason 3. I am lazy. :) Bruno, I'll look into libopt. Also, before I commit code we'll branch the current version, so we can continue to maintain it, but we can keep adding features to HEAD. --dmg Thomas> You do want to suport Unicode file names, so you have to use a Thomas> Unicode string library. But that's all. Thomas> Regards, Tom -- -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . |
From: Erik K. <eri...@gm...> - 2009-10-01 20:10:14
|
On Thursday, October 01, 2009 at 10:07, D M German wrote: > Of course, command line options is something the windows people are not > used to, so we might just "ifdef" them out. Please don't. There are a lot of windows people who are used to command line option - see the popularity of imagemagik f.e. And there are those who use and provide shell scripts to do specific tasks... best regards Erik Krause http://www.erik-krause.de |