From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1591 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Daniel_Cegie=B3ka?= Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Todo for release? Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:53:37 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20120813185329.GA20024@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120815040836.GJ27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120815102029.GL20243@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1345028052 9333 80.91.229.3 (15 Aug 2012 10:54:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 10:54:12 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1592-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Aug 15 12:54:11 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T1bEp-0002NB-2n for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:54:11 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 11606 invoked by uid 550); 15 Aug 2012 10:54:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 11596 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2012 10:54:09 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=wHlfz9tG8VcBKwtUSuTAq4UBvSXSIXXLRwm6+/C3ulA=; b=s+MJGITvN7C9E2urMV0jdWEzd6v1tJV3SYU88UE3hRbVpO36dKuoJUq9PiDeOljgUg W+lpB/pZZUZ5FBk9M5blTqeQ/mSuvnjuhe2ymwxANEGvrKDr0XMeTX36qGEgiUxiU6+b beHiVdt8MaV48/inb3FpQGWL5NWaRmQG/DBLZqdsU0Iplak9Og85FGbxJCoJY4s9i804 be5MzFH/DBJNQ9+gSsPHlNligVpy0l3/COa6/Kw6PxmM8UA3OKWA3cSLqkNFT/jlyfwz k4qworWOEIQKo7Dw5Bsn/Zu/dcu+pR9KeoZL9UE7Wynb2ZFcV61kYfoWetgq5BGjj40H EEPA== In-Reply-To: <20120815102029.GL20243@port70.net> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1591 Archived-At: 2012/8/15 Szabolcs Nagy : > * Daniel Cegie?ka [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[0] 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) I understand that and that's why my first sentence was: This is not something that is absolutely necessary. We often say that we don't want to reproduce 'ugly stuff from glibc etc.' (eg. __progname). This does not change the fact that a lot of code will require patches to fix __progname problem. If Rich has taken the effort to rewrite/fix libc, we can fix __progname... if needed (it's really small patch.. discussed on the list). Daniel