When can argv[0] have null?
Solution 1:
With the exec
class of calls, you specify the program name and program executable separately so you can set it to NULL then.
But that quote is actually from the ISO standard (possibly paraphrased) and that standard covers a awfully large range of execution environments from the smallest micro-controller to the latest z10 Enterprise-class mainframe.
Many of those embedded systems would be in the situation where an executable name makes little sense.
From the latest c1x draft:
The value of
argc
shall be nonnegative.The value
argv[argc]
shall be a null pointer.If the value of
argc
is greater than zero, the array membersargv[0]
throughargv[argc-1]
inclusive shall contain pointers to strings, which are given implementation-defined values by the host environment prior to program start up.
This means that, if argc
is zero (and it can be), argv[0] is NULL.
But, even when argc
is not 0, you may not get the program name, since the standard also states:
If the value of
argc
is greater than zero, the string pointed to byargv[0]
represents the program name;argv[0][0]
shall be the null character if the program name is not available from the host environment. If the value ofargc
is greater than one, the strings pointed to byargv[1]
throughargv[argc-1]
represent the program parameters.
So, there is no requirement under the standard that a program name be provided. I've seen programs use a wide selection of options for this value:
- no value at all (for supposed security).
- a blatant lie (such as
sleep
for a malicious piece of code). - the actual program name (such as
sleep
). - a slightly modified one (such as
-ksh
for the login shell). - a descriptive name (e.g.,
progname - a program for something
).
Solution 2:
According to this mailing list, argv[0]
can be null if argc == 0
. But they don't explain when argc
might ever be zero. I would suspect argc
would be zero in situations where an executable was not launched "normally" (i.e. through a command line, popen
, etc.) -- and indeed, as @paxdiablo mentioned, you can manually set argv
with the exec
family of functions, so argc
could be zero depending on those arguments.
But, in their Rationale section:
Early proposals required that the value of
argc
passed tomain()
be "one or greater". This was driven by the same requirement in drafts of the ISO C standard. In fact, historical implementations have passed a value of zero when no arguments are supplied to the caller of the exec functions. This requirement was removed from the ISO C standard and subsequently removed from this volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 as well. The wording, in particular the use of the word should, requires a Strictly Conforming POSIX Application to pass at least one argument to the exec function, thus guaranteeing thatargc
be one or greater when invoked by such an application. In fact, this is good practice, since many existing applications referenceargv[0]
without first checking the value ofargc
.
So there you have it: Strictly Conforming POSIX Applications must have argc
be greater than zero, but that is otherwise by no means guaranteed.
There's a little more information on the standard regarding argc
and argv
in the Program Startup section.