Mark Kettenis wrote: > > From: "Ted Unangst" <t...@tedunangst.com> > > Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 21:57:00 -0400 > > > > These programs don't do anything interesting based on progname, > > except to echo is back to the user. If the user creates a link, is > > it somehow more correct to print that name? I'd argue the original > > name is better (especially in usage) because then you have a hint > > what man page to read. > > Using __progname in this context has been the standard on *BSD for a > long time. This really feels like unnecessary churn to me.
Yes, although I think it's kind of mindless copying. This code doesn't benefit from progname. (Code that inspects argv[0] does benefit.) I doubt porting these programs is a high priority for anyone, but nevertheless I prefer standard code over nonstandard code. That said, it is kind of noise.
