Re: use of -fno-common on Darwin

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Paul Eggert wrote:

> "Peter O'Gorman" <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > getprogname(3), if it exists, can be used as well as other
> > alternatives (e.g. argv[0]).
>
> Thanks, I wasn't aware of the BSD getprogname until now.
>
> How about this proposal?
>
> * Change the progname module to use the BSD getprogname naming
>  convention.  No sense reinventing the wheel.  That way, programs can
>  simply use the system-defined functions on BSD.
>
> * Rewrite the other gnulib code to use the new convention.
>
> * Ask gnulib users to switch to the new convention.

I was also not aware of BSD getprogname until now but I like its 
definition.  It looks like something useful to standardize on.  The 
problem with argv[0] is that it may not be accessible from within a 
library, and might not be usefully defined, so getprogname() is 
superior for the purpose of obtaining the program name.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/