[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: use of program_name
From: |
Karl Berry |
Subject: |
Re: use of program_name |
Date: |
Thu, 5 Jan 2006 16:12:36 -0600 |
If we put a similar declaration in error.c, it would cause two
different definitions of program_name, and some non-Unix linkers
reject this. (The C Standard allows them to reject it.)
Is it a problem in practice, ie, what are these non-Unix linkers?
How about defining it in error.c with an #ifdef:
#ifdef GNULIB_DO_NOT_DECLARE_PROGRAM_NAME
char *program_name;
#endif
Then programs could define the macro if need be. Perhaps it could be
autoconfed.
This will require revamping pretty much everybody that uses
program_name, but I think it's worth the pain. What do others
think?
Sounds like an uphill battle to me.
Are you thinking that set_program_name will set something other than
program_name? Because of course existing code has to continue to work
... not too clear on how old/new code will mix in this case ...
- use of program_name, Dave Love, 2006/01/04
- Re: use of program_name, Paul Eggert, 2006/01/04
- Re: use of program_name, Dave Love, 2006/01/05
- Re: use of program_name, Paul Eggert, 2006/01/05
- Re: use of program_name,
Karl Berry <=
- Re: use of program_name, Paul Eggert, 2006/01/05
- Re: use of program_name, Eric Blake, 2006/01/05
- Re: use of program_name, James Youngman, 2006/01/06
- Re: use of program_name, James Youngman, 2006/01/06
- Re: use of program_name, Karl Berry, 2006/01/06
- Re: use of program_name, Paul Eggert, 2006/01/06
- Re: use of program_name, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2006/01/06
- Re: use of program_name, Dave Love, 2006/01/06
- Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: use of program_name, Bruno Haible, 2006/01/09
- use of -fno-common on Darwin (was: use of program_name), Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/01/09