Home • About Us • A-Z Index • Search * Contact Us • Register • Login • Press • Shop

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0474 Details

Help Show help | Quick Search | Submit a Test Suite Support Request | Click here to view your privileges

This page provides all information on Problem Report 0474.

Report 0474 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0474
    Submitter's Classification Specification problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Problem Resolution ID REJ.X.0093
    Raised 1994-09-16 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published null
    Product Standard Commands and Utilities V2 (UNIX 95)
    Certification Program The Open Brand certification program
    Test Suite Unknown version N/A
    Test Identification N/A
    Problem Summary PG4R.094 This is a minor typographical error that should fixed in the next version of the XCU spec. The synopsis for the cxref command (described on page 242 of the XPG4 XCU) is as follows: cxref [-cs][-o file...
    Problem Text

    This is a minor typographical error that should fixed in the next version
    of the XCU spec.

    The synopsis for the cxref command (described on page 242 of the XPG4
    XCU) is as follows:

    cxref [-cs][-o file][-w num][-D name[=def]]...[-I dir]...[-U dir]...file ...

    The wording belows indicates that the -U option is supposed to be identical
    to the c89 interpretation. The wording for -U under c89 is -U name. Thus
    the synopsis for cxref should be:

    cxref [-cs][-o file][-w num][-D name[=def]]...[-I dir]...[-U name]...file ...
    Test Output

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    While it is recognised that there is a typographical misnomer in the description
    of cxref which may lead the reader to assume that dir refers to a directory, I
    do not believe that this leads to an ambiguity in the specification. The cxref
    specification defers to the c89 specification for the definition of the -U
    option. The fact that cxref gives [-U dir] and c89 gives [-U name] makes no
    difference to the syntax or semantics of the calls since dir and name are user
    supplied objects of the type described in the c89 specification.

    I agree that the use of [-U dir] is somewhat misleading and should be changed
    to [-U name] for the purposes of improved readability, but I do not believe
    that the use of dir changes the specification in any way.

    I recommend that this request is refused on the grounds that no interpretation
    is necessary.

    No Discussion comments in this Review.


    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Review Conclusion
    This request is refused.

    Problem Reporting System Options:

     

    Back   

Contact the Certification Authority