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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0652 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 0652.

Report 0652 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0652
    Submitter's Classification Specification problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Problem Resolution ID REJ.X.0256
    Raised 1970-01-01 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 VSC version 4.1.4
    Test Identification XOPEN.cmd/uux/uux.ex 1020
    Problem Summary PG4C.00020 Should uux provide shell style pathname expansion on the appropriate system.
    Problem Text
    Assertion 1020 of the uux test purpose tests the following from the
    page 767 XPG4 XCU V2 specification:

    " * In gathering file from different systems, pathname expansion is not
    performed by uux. Thus, a request such as:

    uux "c89 remsys!~/*.c"

    would attempt to copy the file name literally *.c to the local
    system."

    However, this violates historically practice and seems to be an error
    on the part of the spec writers. Historically, pathname expansion
    always occurs.

    On page 769, under the Application Usage section, the following is
    found:

    "As noted in uucp, shell pattern matching notation characters appearing
    in pathnames are expanded on the appropriate local system."

    And on page 745 in the uucp Operands sections the following is found:

    "The shell pattern matching notation characters ?, * and [...] appearing
    in pathname will be expanded on the appropriate system."

    These statements contradict the one above. In most implementations, uucp
    actually calls uux for the file transfers. Thus, uux must be able to
    handle pathname expansion.

    A TSD for uux assertion 1020 or PIN against the XCU V2 specification
    should be issued.
    Test Output

    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. But some rework of the
    uux spec does seem appropriate.

    uux test purpose 1020 is UNTESTED in VSC 4.1.4. So there is no
    possibility of granting a TSD for this request. Shell style
    pathname expansion does not appear to be tested by any assertion.

    We can find no support for the assertion that historical uux
    implementations support pathname expansion. Perhaps the requester
    is confused by the possibility of the shell expanding pathnames
    before the uux command is executed. This may occur during word
    expansion if a pathname does not have a system name, login name
    or ~ prefix. Besides historical practice is not normative.

    We believe that uucico not uux has historically been the
    underlying transport program for uucp.

    While the wording quoted from the uux Application Usage section
    supports the argument, it is not mormative and should be deprecated.

    However, the XCU uux Description Section states that

    A filename can be specified as for uucp;

    it can be an absolute pathname, a pathname preceded by ~name
    (which is replaced by the corresponding login directory), a
    pathname specified as ~/dest (dest is prefixed by the public
    directory called ``PUBDIR''; the actual location of PUBDIR is
    implementation- specific), or a simple filename (which is
    prefixed by uux with the current directory). See uucp for the
    details.

    The first phrase phrase leaves us wondering whether the XCU uucp
    statement

    The shell pattern matching notation characters ?, * and [...]
    appearing in pathname will be expanded on the appropriate system.

    applies.

    We believe that the effort the spec writers made to disallow pathname
    expansion (disallowing it both by rule and by example in a normative
    section) makes it inlikely. But we suggest adding

    Uucp shell pattern matching expansion will not be done
    on filenames in uux.

    to the end of the paragraph above.

    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