On 2017-02-10 10:02, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25671@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Clément Pit--Claudel >> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:17:00 -0500 >> >>> I believe changing the program behavior depending on how it was named >>> in the command that invoked it is against GNU coding standards. >> >> What about providing elisp or emacs-script as a separate binary? > > What about it? Would that be OK? Could it work? I thought it would make implementation simpler to just make the emacs binary ct differently based on how its invoked, but if that's not OK then could we distribute a separate "elisp" or "emacs-script" binary that can be used in a shebang line?