[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issues with progname

From: Pino Toscano
Subject: Re: Issues with progname
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 17:47:49 +0100
User-agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.4.4-301.fc23.x86_64; KDE/4.14.17; x86_64; ; )

On Friday 18 March 2016 09:38:30 Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 03/18/2016 09:08 AM, Pino Toscano wrote:
> > progname is GPL 3+, which means it cannot be used in the main library
> > (which is LGPL 2) without changing the license of the resulting work.
> I expect this is because it was intended to be used only by programs, 
> not by libraries, so GPL was appropriate. If we come up with something 
> that can also be used by libraries, LGPL would be appropriate.

Ironically, programs get away with it with a simple const char*
declaration, while libraries and loadable modules are in a more complex

> > At least on FreeBSD, there is a getprogname() library function which
> > provides what is needed, but cannot be used in a static initializer
> > (while the "program_name" to provide must be like that).
> >
> > My idea would be something like the following:
> > a) change all the program_name usages into call of some internal
> >     function, e.g. gl_get_program_name()
> How about if we use the BSD API instead?  It looks reasonable and is 
> designed to be portable. On BSD our module would do nothing since BSD 
> already does what we want.

That works for me too, both for license and API -- but should progname
be rewritten (breaking users of it), or add a new getprogname module?

Pino Toscano

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]