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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0750 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 0750.

Report 0750 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0750
    Submitter's Classification Specification problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Temporary Interpretation (TIN)
    Problem Resolution ID TIN.X.0041
    Raised 1970-01-01 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published 1995-10-23 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.upe/vi 63
    Specification Commands and Utilities Issue 4 Version 2
    Location in Spec See Problem Text
    Problem Summary TIN4C.00020 The test may fail on implementations that place the current line at the last line of the buffer instead of not executing the command.
    Problem Text
    The test may fail on implementations that adhere to historic practice
    and place the current line at the last line of the buffer instead of
    not executing the command. Although POSIX.2 interpretation #64
    reaffirms the behavior, the POSIX.2b draft reinstates the historic
    behavior.

    The test in question verifies the assertion:
    When control-D is entered in command mode, and the line
    movement would place the current line after the end of the
    file, then the movement does not occur, the terminal is
    alerted, and the current position is not changed.

    This is not the historical behavior of vi. The assertion is based on
    the following language in XCU4 Issue 2, p. 780:
    When a movement command would cause a window to be displayed
    beyond the end of the editing buffer, the terminal will be
    alerted and the command aborted.

    This language is taken directly from POSIX.2. However, IEEE
    interpretation pasc-1003.2-064 addresses a large number of issues
    regarding vi and ex, including this one. This interpretation request
    is too long to cite here in its entirety, but it states in part:

    (37) Vi Command Descriptions
    Section 5.35.7.1, page 631, lines 5000-5012.

    I don't believe that <control-B>, <control-D>, <control-E>,
    <control-F>, <control-T>, <control-U>, or <control-Y> were
    historical cursor motion commands.

    I do believe that +, _ and h were historical cursor motion
    commands.

    Suggestion:
    Delete the first set, add the second set.


    The response to this section was:

    Q37:

    The standard states that <control-B>, <control-D>, <control-E>,
    <control-F>, <control-T>, <control-U>, <control-Y>, +, and _ are
    cursor motion commands, and conforming implementations must conform
    to this. However, concerns have been raised about this which are
    being referred to the sponsor.

    Note also that the language on which the assertion was based is no
    longer present in the most recent draft of POSIX.2b, and that the test
    suite itself contains a comment written to the journal to the effect
    that this appears to be an error and will change. In view of this,
    the assertion is clearly a grey area.

    Test Output
    -----------------start of test output------------------

    ************************************************************************
    /tset/POSIX.upe/vi/vi_01.ex 1 Failed


    Test Information:
    Assertion #63 (C): control-D past end of file
    NOTE: This assertion tests an apparent error =====
    in POSIX.2, to be corrected in next version. =====
    Standard output isn't the same as file 'vi_exp_1'
    diff of "out.stdout" and "vi_exp_1":
    *** out.stdout Thu Sep 21 09:19:13 1995
    --- vi_exp_1 Thu Sep 21 09:18:39 1995
    ***************
    *** 91,99 ****
    91:
    92:
    93:
    ! z94:
    95:
    96:
    97:
    98:
    ! a99:
    --- 91,99 ----
    91:
    92:
    93:
    ! az94:
    95:
    96:
    97:
    98:
    ! 99:
    ************************************************************************
    ------------------end of test output-------------------

    Note: this output was from the vrpt report.

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    Anticipating acceptance of the completely rewritten vi specification
    in POSIX 2003.2b/D11 and the eventual alignment of the tests with it
    a temporary interpretation is recommended.

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

    Problem Reporting System Options:

     

    Back   

Contact the Certification Authority