Re: [PATCH] Making use of argp in GRUB utilities

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Friday 26 January 2007 17:03, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Lubomir Kundrak <address@hidden> writes:
> >> 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.
> >
> > Sound reasonable. Would it be of any use if I converted other utils to
> > make use of argp in my spare time?
>
> It seems either that Okuji doesn't care or doesn't know yet.  I
> personally prefer argp because it is easy to use, flexible and less
> work to maintain.  And like you said, less code... less code normally
> means less bugs.
>
> So it depends on Okuji what to do.  If he doesn't care I would be
> happy with such a patch.

I don't know. I agree that using a single library for the same goal is more 
consistent. However, I am so used to getopt, and I have no problem with it. 
Thus I am not eager to migrate to argp in particular, although I do not 
object to using argp.

(In my whole life, I have used argp only once for Hurd.)

Okuji