Hi Paul, Thank you for the detailed explanation; it helps clarify the constraints significantly.
I understand your concerns regarding bootstrapping and portability, especially for non-POSIX environments like Windows and VMS. Given these complexities, could you please guide me on how best to proceed? If there are specific areas where incremental cleanups or improvements would be more appropriate and useful, I would be happy to focus my efforts there instead. Thanks again for the guidance. Best regards, Shubham Chakraborty On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 11:14 AM Shubham Chakraborty < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the input. > > I see the point about incremental improvement, and I do have a consistent > fix prepared locally for the getopt-related declarations. > > However, since Paul suggested moving in the gnulib-port direction, I'll > start looking into that approach and follow up with something concrete > there. > > Regarding the email address 66 was just the first available suggestion > after it rejected 23 so I went with it. > > Thanks, > Shubham > > On Sun, Apr 19, 2026 at 11:18 PM Dmitry Goncharov <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 19, 2026 at 4:17 AM Shubham Chakraborty >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Would you prefer that I send a corrected incremental patch updating all >> declarations consistently, or instead help move this toward the gnulib-port >> approach? >> >> "Continuous improvement is better than delayed perfection." - (Mark Twain >> ?) >> >> i have a question for you though. Was chakrabortyshubham at gmail.com >> really taken, as well as chakrabortyshubham1, etc. and you had to take >> chakrabortyshubham66? >> >> regards, Dmitry >> >
