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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0702 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 0702.

Report 0702 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0702
    Submitter's Classification Specification problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Permanent Interpretation (PIN)
    Problem Resolution ID PIN.X.0095
    Raised 1970-01-01 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published 1997-07-07 08:00
    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.cmd/mkfifo 23,24,25,26
    Specification Commands and Utilities Issue 4 Version 2
    Location in Spec See Problem Text
    Problem Summary PIN4C.00019 The tests expect that the mkfifo -m command will be affected by the current setting of umask. This is not necessary.
    Problem Text
    The behavior of the -m option and its interaction with the umask value
    is currently the subject of an interpretation (PASC 1003.2-92 #124)
    with the proposed resolution being that the standard is unclear on this
    issue and no conformance distinction can be made between alternative
    implementations. This is being referred to the sponsor.
    Test Output

    Assertion #23 (A): When a single mode clause starts with 'u' and nonzero umask
    Command failed: 'expr "Xpr-xr--rw-" : 'Xprw[a-z]r-[A-Z-]rw[A-Z-]' >/dev/null 2>&1'
    Assertion Result: FAIL

    Assertion #24 (A): When a single mode clause starts with 'g' and nonzero umask
    Command failed: 'expr "Xpr--r-xrw-" : 'Xpr-[A-Z-]rw[a-z]rw[A-Z-]' >/dev/null 2>&1'
    Assertion Result: FAIL

    Assertion #25 (A): When a single mode clause starts with 'o' and nonzero umask
    Command failed: 'expr "Xprw-r--r-x" : 'Xprw[A-Z-]r-[A-Z-]rw[a-z]' >/dev/null 2>&1'
    Assertion Result: FAIL

    Assertion #26 (A): When a single mode clause has op '+' and who and param are specified
    Command failed: 'expr "Xprw-r----x" : 'Xprw[A-Z-]r-[A-Z-]-w[a-z]' >/dev/null 2>&1'
    Assertion Result: FAIL

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    pasc-1003.2-124 is a pending interpretation request that states

    The interp. request pasc-1003.2-67 (mkdir, Section 4.41)
    identified wording in the standard which was unclear. This
    (almost) identical wording in mkdir also occurs in the
    description for mkfifo.

    Should mkfifo -m mode utilize the current umask in setting permissions?
    Or should the same resolution from interp #67 also apply to mkfifo?

    The 1003.2-1992 rationale for mkfifo says that the -m option was added
    to control the file mode, for consistency with the similar functionality
    provided in the mkdir utility. Hence, I think that the -m option to
    mkfifo should behave similar to the -m option for mkdir.

    We believe the issues with mkfifo are identical to the issues with
    mkdir which resulted in a a pasc-1003.2-67 stating

    The standard is unclear on this issue, and no conformance distinction can
    be made between alternative implementations based on this. This is being
    referred to the sponsor.

    In our opinion, this issue will eventually result in mkfifo's
    interaction with the current umask being undefined when the -m
    option is used.

    A temporary interpretation is recommended.

    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution Permanent Interpretation (PIN)
    Review Conclusion
    A Permanent Interpretation is granted.

    Problem Reporting System Options:

     

    Back   

Contact the Certification Authority