On Sun, Mar 16, 2008, Jeff Johnson wrote:

> Should I add the getopt(3) POSIXMEHARDER, e.g.
>
>     rpm --define '%foo(+) <%*>' --eval '%{foo bar %(echo -n "quux") baz}'
> <bar quux baz>
>
> Note %foo(+) ...
>
> It would be nice to have an answer to "feature regression" as well. Too bad
> "+'
> is an opt-out disabler of POSIXMEHARDER, likely a opt-in enabler is more
> workable
> work for macros.
>
> Hmm, perhaps %foo(+) and %foo(-) as switches ...

Yes, as long as %foo(+) is the default it would be cool to be able to
have macros with and without option/argument permutation support. So,
%foo(+) should use POSIXMEHARDER and %foo(-) not. Go for it if you also
like this...
                                       Ralf S. Engelschall
                                       rse@engelschall.com
                                       www.engelschall.com