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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0659 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 0659.

Report 0659 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0659
    Submitter's Classification Test Suite problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Problem Resolution ID REJ.X.0263
    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 POSIX.upe/fg/fg.sh 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13
    Problem Summary PG4C.00013 Patch 4.1.4B exists as a workaround for these issues.
    Problem Text
    This was submitted previously as a Bug Report with the following
    response from ApTest:

    RESPONSE:

    This will be fixed in the next release.

    X/open has stated that intermittent test failures should not be
    granted TSDs. Instead after your branding run the test should be
    run manually using vscrun and a journal demonstrating a PASS
    should be submitted as the basis for the waiver request.

    This response is in direct conflict of the requirements of single
    test run that X/Open requires for conformance labs to submit
    branding application. This response indicates that it is okay to
    run a failing testcase until a PASS test result is received and submit
    that run, no matter how many runs it takes.

    Our Conformance Lab has not received any communication from X/Open
    stating they are removing the single test run requirement. Until
    such communication is received (either by accepting this TSD and stating
    this, or email to the vsc_users mail list), Conformance Labs must
    follow this requirement.

    ApTest has agreed that the testcases are bad, whether or not the failures
    are intermittent is irrelevant. The testcases are not working, and a TSD
    should be issued until the testcases are fixed. Testing fg has been a
    problem since the first Alpha test. And 5 of the 8 assertions fail
    100% of the time.
    Test Output
    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved

    Test Information:
    Assertion #4 (C): fg with no job_id runs most recently suspended job in
    foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************

    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved


    Test Information:
    Assertion #5 (C): fg with job_id runs specified job in foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************

    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved


    Test Information:
    Assertion #7 (C): GA28: fg accepts '--' before operands
    Unexpected exit 14 from expect.
    Contents of fg_7_err:
    ************************************************************************


    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved

    Test Information:
    Assertion #8 (C): fg %% runs current job in the foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************


    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved

    Test Information:
    Assertion #10 (C): fg %- runs previous job in the foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************


    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved


    Test Information:
    Assertion #11 (C): fg %n runs job number n in the foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************


    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved


    Test Information:
    Assertion #12 (C): fg %string runs job starting with string in the
    foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************


    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/fg/fg.ex 1 Unresolved

    Test Information:
    Assertion #13 (C): fg %?string runs job containing string in the
    foreground
    Unable to determine job status.
    ************************************************************************


    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.

    Our initial reccommendation was based on the report that these
    tests were failing intermittently, not persistently as noted
    above. We believe failing virtually every fg test is unacceptable.

    Patch 4.1.4B provides a workaround for these failures. We reccommend
    that the implementation be required to apply this patch prior
    to making a single branding run.

    More evidence is required as to whether the implementation is in fact
    conformant, for example by running the failing tests with the 4.2.4B patch

    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