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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0558 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 0558.

Report 0558 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0558
    Submitter's Classification Test Suite problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Problem Resolution ID REJ.X.0162
    Raised 1970-01-01 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published null
    Product Standard Commands and Utilities V3 (UNIX 98)
    Certification Program The Open Brand certification program
    Test Suite VSC version 5.0.1
    Test Identification XOPEN.cmd/get 1097
    Problem Summary PG4C.00116 This request claims that the test improperly fails on implementations which do not create a g-file when the cutoff argument to -c is earlier than the date the s-file was created.
    Problem Text

    The get test case 1097 verifies four different year cutoff dates.
    The portion of the test case that tests for the year 1970 fails
    at line 11367 due to the data file from the previous test condition
    at line 11327 still exists. The trace below with an "ls -l $get_gfile"
    demonstrates the data file still exists on reaching the year 1970
    posrtion of the code. The test case needs to remove data files
    on completion of each assertion being tested.

    1> out.stdout 2> out.stderr
    + CT_EXIT_VALUE=0
    + [ 0 -ne 0 ]
    + SetResult PASS
    + [ ! -s out.stderr ]
    + SetResult PASS
    + get_cmpfiles get_data_1 get_exp_1
    + [ 0 -ne 0 ]
    + SetResult PASS
    + JrnlMsg TEST: YY = 70
    + dtime=700101000000
    + [ 0 -ne 0 ]
    + ls -l get_data_1
    -r--r--r-- 1 vsc0 vscg0 122 Apr 5 09:00 get_data_1
    + get -c 700101000000 s.get_data_1
    + 1> out.stdout 2> out.stderr
    + CT_EXIT_VALUE=1
    + [ -s out.stdout ]
    + SetResult PASS
    + [ -s get_data_1 ]
    + get_cmpfiles get_data_1 get_exp_1
    + 1> out.stdout 2> out.stderr
    + CT_EXIT_VALUE=0
    + [ 0 -eq 0 ]
    + SetResult FAIL Expected exit code != 0; Received 0

    Test Output

    10|1 /tset/XOPEN.cmd/get/get.ex 08:54:09|TC Start, scenario ref 0-1, ICs {1097}
    15|1 1.10 1|TCM Start 400|1 1097 1 08:54:16|IC Start
    200|1 1 08:54:16|TP Start
    520|1 1 9806 1 1|Assertion #1097 (C): Ranges of the YY component for -c
    520|1 1 9806 1 11|TEST: YY = 00
    520|1 1 9806 1 12|TEST: YY = 38
    520|1 1 9806 1 13|TEST: YY = 70
    520|1 1 9806 1 14|Expected exit code != 0; Received 0
    520|1 1 9806 1 15|TEST: YY = 99
    220|1 1 1 08:54:20|FAIL
    410|1 1097 1 08:54:20|IC End

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    We recommend this request be refused.

    We do not believe the issue here is whether the get command must
    overwrite an existing version of a file with a new version. The
    test expects this behavior between each TEST: step shown above.
    Since there are no errors between the "TEST: 00" and "TEST: 38"
    steps the submitter's implementation allows this.

    We believe the submitter is claiming that proper behavior for the
    get command is to exit without writing to the g-file if the
    cutoff argument to the -c option is a date before the first delta
    for the file was created.

    We believe proper behavior in this case is to recreate an empty
    g-file and output no lines to it. This is based on the XCU get
    spec, Output Files section, which states

    The g-file, which contains the generated text, is created in the
    current directory ... A g-file is created in all cases, whether
    or not any lines of text were generated by the get.

    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