> Personally?  I don't like things that mutate based on argv[0].  It is
> rarely useful and even more rarely justifiable, in my opinion.  If you
> insist, I could live with that default, but I still want to be able to
> override it in either direction.  (It's really obnoxious to have to
> write a wrapper that passes an argv[0] string that doesn't point to the
> executable just to coax it into behaving....)

Huh?  Why would you want to write a wrapper?  Just rename/link the file
to whatever name you want as argv[0]...
--
ws@TooLs.DE     (Wolfgang Solfrank, TooLs GmbH) 	+49-228-985800