[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module
From: |
Gisle Vanem |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Sep 2016 19:22:09 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 |
Jim Meyering wrote:
> +# elif HAVE_DECL___ARGV
> + return last_component (__argv);
This should be:
return last_component (*__argv);
Or with a bit more care:
if (*__argv == NULL)
return ("?");
return last_component (__argv);
And in the test:
+int
+main (void)
+{
+ char const *p = getprogname ();
+ assert (STREQ (p, "test-getprogname"));
+ return 0;
+}
getprogname() would return "test-getprogname.exe" on
Windows. Hence a fail.
BTW, what is 'base' used for here:
# elif HAVE_GETEXECNAME
const char *base = getexecname ();
if (!base)
base = "?";
return last_component (program_invocation_name);
--
--gv
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, (continued)
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Pino Toscano, 2016/09/05
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/05
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Pino Toscano, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, T J, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Pino Toscano, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Gisle Vanem, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/06
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/07
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module,
Gisle Vanem <=
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/07
- Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module, Jim Meyering, 2016/09/08