On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 06:00:28PM -0800, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:53:06PM +1100, Luke Mewburn wrote:
> 
>  > because we're very inconsistent in the tree about whether we use
>  > __progname or the explicit name, with the explicit name seeming to
>  > have more use.
> 
> Well, personally, I'd rather see more consistent use of __progname.  If
> we're going to use __progname in usage(), and not in syslogs, well, that
> seems kind of silly.

It could be argued that syslog is logging a service identifier, and
not just a specific program identifier.

Inside libc, the default for syslog is actually __progname. If you don't
want to override the default in your openlog call, you'd just do
	openlog(NULL, 0, LOG_FOO);
Not that this behaviour is documented explicitly in syslog(3) though...

Anyway, as I said earlier, we had very inconsistent use of openlog,
with it tending towards hard-coded names vs __progname, so I felt it
was better to make it consistent to a norm. Also, if I changed it all
to __progname I'm sure I wouldn't have gotten flamed for adding more
use of __progname as well. One can't win, I suppose...