Re: [GNUnet-developers] GNUNET_PROGRAM* option evaluation does not work as expected

[Schanzenbach, Martin]

No it was not.
I am pretty sure that instead of calling gnunet-uri as a binary from a binary 
is pretty nonsensical.
Instead, gnunet-qr should just do what gnunet-uri does with the uri.
If we need to share code between them, fine, then refactor. But imitating 
python behavior here is not good style.
Hence the CLI tools should be built using GNUNET_PROGRAM_run ().

> On 15. Mar 2019, at 06:10, Christian Grothoff <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> On 3/13/19 6:25 PM, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
>> Martin wrote:
>>> The first thing you should do it use GNUNET_PROGRAM*.
> 
> Actually, that advice was slightly off: as you don't want/need the
> scheduler, you don't need GNUNET_PROGRAM_run() but just GNUNET_GETOPT_*
> for gnunet-qr.
> 
> 
>

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP