> wouldn't this be better done with <paths.h> or "pathnames.h" ?

That's not stylistically consistent with what's already there.

in the general case, for sources that 'we maintain', that'd be the
right way to do it -- and all other uses of pathnames in the program
would be converted to use it.

However, for programs that we don't maintain, it's not clear that
that's practical, and in making the change, i chose to stick with the
style that was already in use by other parts of the program.


consistency is reasonably nice.


cgd