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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0669 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 0669.

Report 0669 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0669
    Submitter's Classification Specification problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Problem Resolution ID REJ.X.0273
    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 4.1.1
    Test Identification POSIX.upe/vtags 0
    Problem Summary PG4C.00003 Request for guidance in interpreting spec.
    Problem Text
    The following seem to be contradictory:
    1. The ctags and nm utilities are under POSIX.2 section 5, User
    Portability Utilities Option.
    2. X/OPEN Commands and Utilities, Issue 4, section 1.4.1, first
    bullet states:
    "... The subdivision of the standard into optional
    components is generally followed, with the
    exceptions that the User Portability Extension
    is a mandatory feature of the XSI, and development
    options have been grouped together more closely."
    3. In X/OPEN Commands and Utilities, Issue 4, the development
    utilities include ctags and nm.
    An implementation may support any or all of the development
    utilities.
    Number 2 above states that ctags and nm will be required, as will
    all of the UPE utilities for XPG4 base branding.
    Number 3 states that ctags and nm are optional.
    The test suite uses POSIX2_UPE to determine if these tests should
    be run. If POSIX2_UPE is undefined, the test result code is
    UNSUPPORTED. This contradicts number 2 above.
    It also allows that an implementation pass the test suite without
    supporting (or testing) any of the UPE utilities. This would happen
    if POSIX2_UPE is undefined.
    If an implementation claims support for POSIX2_UPE but does not
    claim support for the XPG4 Development Option, must that
    implementation support the ctags and nm utilities?
    Test Output

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response


    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution No Resolution Given
    Review Conclusion
    This is not an interpretation request in the normal sense as no specific
    interpretation of the text is asked for or disputed. Granting the "request"
    would be meaningless. A refusal is therefore recommended.

    As the applicant has sought advice on the meaning of the X/Open
    specification, and its relation to 1003.2, we have in this case obliged by
    drafting some non binding guidance on the XPG4 text, 1003.2 and the impact
    on VSC4, as follows:

    1. To conform to XPG4 Commands and Utilities V2, the Posix UPE must be
    supported, except for ctags and nm. Support for ctags and nm is mandatory
    only if support for the Development option is also claimed.

    2. XPG4 Commands and Utilities V2 allows POSIX2_UPE to be undefined and
    support for the 1003.2 UPU to be indicated by a call to getconf().

    3. To conform to 1003.2, nm and ctags must be supported if support for the
    1003.2 UPE and the 1003.2 SW Dev Utilities Option are claimed
    (See POSIX 1003.2-1992 Section 5, page 485, lines 6-11;
    Section 5.7, page 505, lines 676-679; Section E.5, page 971, table E-3.)

    4. In XPG4 mode VSC should require the 1003.2 UPU to be supported

    5. In XPG4 mode with support for the Development Option not claimed (but
    with 1003.2 UPU support claimed), VSC should allow nm and ctags to be
    unsupported or non conforming

    6. In Posix mode, if support for both the 1003.2 UPU and the 1003.2 SW Dev
    Utilities Option is claimed, VSC should fail implementations that do not
    correctly support nm and ctags

    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