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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 0780 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 0780.

Report 0780 Actions

    Problem Report Number 0780
    Submitter's Classification Test Suite problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Test Suite Deficiency (TSD)
    Problem Resolution ID TSD.X.0295
    Raised 1970-01-01 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published 1998-06-08 08:00
    Product Standard Commands and Utilities V2 (UNIX 95)
    Certification Program The Open Brand certification program
    Test Suite VSC version 4.1.6
    Test Identification POSIX.cmd/mailx 329
    Problem Summary TSD4C.00216 This test may fail intermitently on all implementations.
    Problem Text
    This test case tests that various forms of the 'reply' command
    (repl, rep, r, respond, ... etc.) all behave the same as 'reply'.
    It does this by first executing the 'reply' command, and saving the
    stdout to file. Then it executes all the other command forms, and
    compares their stdout against the saved one from 'reply'. The
    failure is due to a difference in the time stamp in the Date:
    header line in the created message, since of course time passes
    between invocations of the various commands. So we believe the
    test case itself is at fault-- it should not just do a diff of
    the entire stdout files, but instead just do a grep for
    "Re: <subject>" to verify behavior. Since it's a timing problem,
    this test case only fails on occasion.
    Test Output
    Assertion #329 (C): reply command can be abbreviated r, re,
    <LC> ..,respond
    Standard output isn't the same as file 'mailx_out_1'
    diff of "out.stdout" and "mailx_out_1":
    *** out.stdout Wed Oct 8 23:33:00 1997
    --- mailx_out_1 Wed Oct 8 23:32:46 1997
    ***************
    *** 6,11 ****
    U 4 vsc@stdpro.london. Wed Oct 8 17:13 22/712 V
    <LC> SC_TEST_MESSAGE_4
    U 5 vsc@stdpro.london. Wed Oct 8 17:13 22/714 V
    <LC> SC_TEST_MESSAGE_5 *
    To: vsc@stdpro.london.sco.COM
    ! Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 23:33 BST
    Subject: Re: VSC_TEST_MESSAGE_3

    --- 6,11 ----
    U 4 vsc@stdpro.london. Wed Oct 8 17:13 22/712 V
    <LC> SC_TEST_MESSAGE_4
    U 5 vsc@stdpro.london. Wed Oct 8 17:13 22/714 V
    <LC> SC_TEST_MESSAGE_5 *
    To: vsc@stdpro.london.sco.COM
    ! Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 23:32 BST
    Subject: Re: VSC_TEST_MESSAGE_3

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    We agree this is a test suite deficiency in the test
    suite version(s) listed.

    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution Test Suite Deficiency (TSD)
    Review Conclusion
    This is an agreed Test Suite Deficiency.

    Problem Reporting System Options:

     

    Back   

Contact the Certification Authority