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

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 1933 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 1933.

Report 1933 Actions

    Problem Report Number 1933
    Submitter's Classification Test Suite problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Rejected (REJ)
    Problem Resolution ID REJ.X.0569
    Raised 2003-02-03 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published null
    Product Standard Internationalised System Calls and Libraries Extended V2 (UNIX 98)
    Certification Program The Open Brand certification program
    Test Suite VSX5 version 5.2.3
    Test Identification LFS.os/procenv/sysconf 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11
    Problem Summary PG5R.012 The following problem tests incorrectly report an Unsupported test result. They do so because rather than relying on sysconf() to determine if a feature is supported or not, they instead check to see ...
    Problem Text
    The following problem tests incorrectly report an Unsupported test
    result. They do so because rather than relying on sysconf() to
    determine if a feature is supported or not, they instead check to
    see if any of the _XBS5_* symbols are defined in <unistd.h>. If
    they are not defined, the tests assume the feature is not supported.

    In the <unistd.h> description in the XPG6 Base Definitions, these
    symbols are listed under the section titled "Constants for Options
    and Options Groups (page 398). This section states the following:

    "The following symbolic constants, if defined in <unistd.h>, shall
    have a value of -1, 0, or greater, unless otherwise specified below.
    If these are undefined, the fpathconf(), pathconf(), or sysconf()
    functions can be used to determine whether the option is provided
    for a particular invocation of the application.
    Test Output
    This is an example of the test output for each of the above:

    ************************************************************************
    /tset/LFS.os/procenv/sysconf/T.sysconf 1 Unsupported

    Test Description:
    For UNIX03 mode:
    If the implementation supports the LEGACY option group:
    If _XBS5_ILP32_OFF32 is defined with the value -1 in the
    header file <unistd.h>,
    then a call to sysconf(_SC_XBS5_ILP32_OFF32) returns the
    value -1 and does not change the value of errno.
    For other test modes:
    If _XBS5_ILP32_OFF32 is defined with the value -1 in the
    header file <unistd.h>,
    then a call to sysconf(_SC_XBS5_ILP32_OFF32) returns the
    value -1 and does not change the value of errno.

    Test Information:
    _XBS5_ILP32_OFF32 not defined

    ************************************************************************

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    There are number of problems with this interpretation request:

    1. The interpretation is requested for tests 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10
    and 11, but test results have only been given for test 1.

    2. Unsupported results do not indicate a non-compliance and so
    do not require interpretations.

    3. The rationale refers to `XPG6 Base Definitions', but the correct
    specification for the product standard against which the
    interpretation is being requested is XSH5.

    4. For a test of a conditional assertion, an Unsupported result means
    that the condition stated in the assertion was not true. In test 1 the
    condition is "If _XBS5_ILP32_OFF32 is defined with the value -1 in the
    header file <unistd.h>". Since _XBS5_ILP32_OFF32 is not defined, the
    condition (that it is defined with value -1) is not true and the tests
    are therefore right to report an Unsupported result.

    It is recommended that this request is refused.

    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution No Resolution Given
    Review Conclusion
    This Request is refused on procedural grounds. The applicant asserts that
    the tests are not run, and should be. Granting the TSD would have no
    effect on certification since a TSD waives the result of a test and no
    such waiver is required for Unsupported. If the test suite is in error,
    a work around will be required. The determination of whether there is
    such an error in the test suite, is best handled by the standard test
    suite support mechanism, rather than by the interpretations mechanism.

    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