[RFC] should --version report the program's true name?

[RFC] should --version report the program's true name?

[Benno Schulenberg]

$ ln -s setarch foo

$ ./foo --version
foo from util-linux 2.25.634-8501-dirty

But util-linux does not contain any program called "foo":

$ man foo
No manual entry for foo

Shouldn't --version report the name of the original program
instead of the name of the binary?  Just like the last line
of the --help output does:

$ ./foo --help | tail -1
For more details see setarch(8).

Benno

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

Re: [RFC] should --version report the program's true name?

[Karel Zak]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 06:15:01PM +0100, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
> 
> $ ln -s setarch foo

echo ".so man8/setarch.8" > foo.8

> $ ./foo --version
> foo from util-linux 2.25.634-8501-dirty
> 
> But util-linux does not contain any program called "foo":
> 
> $ man foo
> No manual entry for foo
> 
> Shouldn't --version report the name of the original program
> instead of the name of the binary?  Just like the last line
> of the --help output does:
> 
> $ ./foo --help | tail -1
> For more details see setarch(8).

but we usually have man pages for the distributed symlinks :-)

   try "man i386"

 Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com