Subject: openssl: [CA.pl] Change to use standard GNU --long and -s short option syntax
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:05:22 +0200
Package: openssl
Version: 0.9.7e-3
Severity: minor
The options in CA.pl are now defined as:
?, -h, -help
prints a usage message.
-newcert
...
However, thsi does not comply with de facto GNU option syntax where
longer name are prefixed with "--" and short options with "-". Perl
guidelines also suggest using Getop::Long for purpose like this.
It seesm that the CA.pl uses home grown option handling so changing
it to use Getop::Long would be simple.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-1-686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ISO-8859-1) (ignored: LC_ALL set to en_US)
Versions of packages openssl depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libssl0.9.7 0.9.7e-3 SSL shared libraries
-- no debconf information
Hi Jari,
Jari Aalto schrieb:
> Package: openssl
> Version: 0.9.7e-3
> Severity: minor
>
>
> The options in CA.pl are now defined as:
>
> ?, -h, -help
> prints a usage message.
>
> -newcert
> ...
>
> However, thsi does not comply with de facto GNU option syntax where
> longer name are prefixed with "--" and short options with "-". Perl
> guidelines also suggest using Getop::Long for purpose like this.
>
> It seesm that the CA.pl uses home grown option handling so changing
> it to use Getop::Long would be simple.
The whole openssl suite uses this sort of options. So it would habe to
be changed in all the commands. I don't see a chance for an upstream change.
Christoph
--
============================================================================
Christoph Martin, EDV der Verwaltung, Uni-Mainz, Germany
Internet-Mail: [email protected]
Telefon: +49-6131-3926337
Fax: +49-6131-3922856
severity 298858 wishlist
thanks
Le vendredi 29 avril 2005 16:48, Christoph Martin a écrit :
> > It seesm that the CA.pl uses home grown option handling so changing
> > it to use Getop::Long would be simple.
>
> The whole openssl suite uses this sort of options. So it would habe
> to be changed in all the commands. I don't see a chance for an
> upstream change.
Yep, and there are tons of other command line programs in other packages
using this (BSD?) syntax too. Why should it be changed anyway? (good
candidate for the wontfix rag IMHO, but I'm not package maintainer).
--
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net/
Acknowledgement sent
to PT FINDORA INTERNUSA <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian OpenSSL Team <[email protected]>.
(Wed, 22 Sep 2021 04:39:27 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Hello,
Good morning,
We have gone through your samples from a partner and Here is our Order
List. Please do bear in mind that we are very much in need of this
order, quote your competitive prices.
Kindly send the Order confirmation.
Your early reply will be much appreciated.
Best Regards,
Maryanah Erwin.
PT FINDORA INTERNUSA
Jln Pahlawan 66 Kec. Arjawinangun
45162 CIREBON West-Java INDONESIA
tel : +62 231 357334
fax: +62 231 357260
email: [email protected]
Acknowledgement sent
to PT FINDORA INTERNUSA <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and filed, but not forwarded.
(Wed, 22 Sep 2021 04:43:00 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).