Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:20:29 +0200 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Todo for release? * Daniel Cegie?ka <daniel.cegielka@...il.com> [2012-08-15 10:55:06 +0200]: > >> - Support for __progname (Daniel) > > > > Daniel, any more thoughts on this? Are there lots of programs that > > want it that can't easily be patched to simply use argv themselves? > > This is not something that is absolutely necessary. __progname quite > often is used on *BSD and less on Linux (eg. Owl's msulogin, > popa3d)... but __progname is always easy to fix. > i think the fact that *bsd uses it is not enough justification openbsd uses it because it's part of their style guide for whatever reason "The __progname string may be used instead of hard-coding the program name." http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=style&sektion=9 but we don't support many things from there (like sys/queue.h) i don't think many linux tools uses it as it's not part of the lsb and glibc has its own silly program_invocation_name and program_invocation_short_name (which are aliases to __progname and __progname_full) the main justification i see is that we already support bsd err and warn apis which are required to print the __progname as well (currently they don't and actually a simple warn("hi"); segfaults here with musl but i havent investigated it)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.