X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Subject: Re: program_invocation_name From: "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" To: cygwin In-Reply-To: <4D15177E.7080508@redhat.com> References: <4D15177E DOT 7080508 AT redhat DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:39:53 -0600 Message-ID: <1293331193.5636.4.camel@YAAKOV04> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 14:58 -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > Porting of some programs originally written for glibc over to cygwin > would be easier if cygwin could provide the global variables char* > program_invocation_{short_,}name, set automatically to match argv[0] of > main(), and declared in when strict standards compliance isn't > requested. util-linux would benefit from this as well. > Is it worth my time to go ahead and submit a patch to add > this? Or is our party line still that as long as you are using > non-portable means, you should just continue to use > readlink("/proc/self/exe") when porting to cygwin? FWIW, since we strive to be a "Linux-like environment" (per our website), then I think it should go in. Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple