Re: bin/38327: uu{en,de}code - any reason to use non-portable [sg]etprogname?

[christos%zoulas.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

On Mar 29,  5:07pm, cheusov%tut.by@localhost (Aleksey Cheusov) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: bin/38327: uu{en,de}code - any reason to use non-portable [sg

| I had nothing agaist err() or getprogname() in NetBSD's libc.  I just
| didn't see any reason to use getprogname() and setprogname() in
| exactly two .c files: uuencode.c and uudecode.c. I've already
| answered: if an independance of executable name is your goal, feel
| free to close this PR. If somebody call 'uuencode' a 'foobar'...

Yes, we like all programs to not hard-code their program name, so that
they behave consistently.

christos