Document Number: AUSTIN/75r1 Title: XCUd5 Aardvark Change Request Report (DRAFT) Revision Date: 2001-03-16 Source: Andrew Josey, Chair Action: for review This report contains the dispositions of the aardvark comments submitted against the XCU Draft 5. Aardvark Summary Table (XCUd5) ______________________ ERN 1 Accept ERN 2 Accept as marked ERN 3 Accept ERN 4 Accept ERN 5 Accept ERN 6 Accept ERN 7 Accept ERN 8 Accept ERN 9 Accept as marked ERN 10 Accept as marked ERN 11 Accept ERN 12 Accept ERN 13 Accept ERN 14 Accept ERN 15 Accept ERN 16 Accept ERN 17 Accept ERN 18 Accept ERN 19 Accept ERN 20 Accept ERN 21 Accept ERN 22 Accept ERN 23 Accept ERN 24 Accept as marked ERN 25 Accept ERN 26 Accept ERN 27 Accept as marked ERN 28 Accept as marked ERN 29 Accept ERN 30 Accept ERN 31 Accept as marked ERN 32 Accept as marked ERN 33 Accept as marked ERN 34 Accept ERN 35 Accept ERN 36 Accept ERN 37 Accept ERN 38 Accept ERN 39 Accept ERN 40 Accept ERN 41 Accept ERN 42 Accept ERN 43 Accept ERN 44 Accept ERN 45 Accept ERN 46 Accept ERN 47 Accept ERN 48 Accept ERN 49 Accept ERN 50 Accept as marked ERN 51 Accept ERN 52 Accept ERN 53 Accept ERN 54 Accept ERN 55 Accept ERN 56 Accept ERN 57 Accept ERN 58 Accept ERN 59 Accept ERN 60 Accept ERN 61 Accept ERN 62 Accept ERN 63 Accept ERN 64 Accept ERN 65 Accept ERN 66 Accept as marked ERN 67 Accept ERN 68 Accept ERN 69 Accept ERN 70 Accept ERN 71 Accept ERN 72 Accept ERN 73 Accept as marked ERN 74 Accept as marked ERN 75 Accept as marked ERN 76 Accept ERN 77 Accept ERN 78 Accept ERN 79 Accept ERN 80 Accept as marked ERN 81 Reject ERN 82 Accept ERN 83 Accept ERN 84 Accept ERN 85 Accept ERN 86 Accept ERN 87 Accept ERN 88 Accept ERN 89 Reject ERN 90 Accept ERN 91 Accept ERN 92 Accept ERN 93 Accept as marked ERN 94 Accept as marked ERN 95 Accept ERN 96 Accept ERN 97 Accept ERN 98 Accept ERN 99 Accept as marked ERN 100 Accept ERN 101 Accept ERN 102 Accept ERN 103 Accept ERN 104 Accept as marked ERN 105 Accept ERN 106 Reject ERN 107 Accept ERN 108 Accept ERN 109 Accept as marked ERN 110 Accept ERN 111 Accept ERN 112 Accept ERN 113 Accept ERN 114 Accept as marked ERN 115 Accept as marked ERN 116 Accept ERN 117 Accept ERN 118 Reject ERN 119 Accept ERN 120 Accept as marked ERN 121 Accept ERN 122 Reject ERN 123 Reject ERN 124 Accept ERN 125 Accept ERN 126 Accept ERN 127 Reject ERN 128 Accept ERN 129 Accept as marked ERN 130 Reject ERN 131 Accept ERN 132 Accept ERN 133 Accept ERN 134 Accept as marked ERN 135 Accept ERN 136 Accept ERN 137 Accept ERN 138 Accept ERN 139 Accept as marked ERN 140 Accept ERN 141 Accept ERN 142 Accept as marked ERN 143 Accept ERN 144 Accept ERN 145 Accept ERN 146 Accept ERN 147 Accept ERN 148 Accept ERN 149 Accept ERN 150 Duplicate of 152 ERN 151 Duplicate of 152 ERN 152 Accept ERN 153 Accept ERN 154 Accept ERN 155 Accept ERN 156 Accept ERN 157 Accept ERN 158 Accept ERN 159 Accept ERN 160 Accept ERN 161 Accept ERN 162 Accept ERN 163 Accept as marked ERN 164 Accept ERN 165 Duplicate of 163 ERN 166 Accept ERN 167 Reject ERN 168 Accept ERN 169 Accept ERN 170 Accept ERN 171 Accept ERN 172 Accept ERN 173 Accept ERN 174 Accept ERN 175 Accept ERN 176 Accept ERN 177 Accept ERN 178 Accept ERN 179 OPEN ERN 180 Accept ERN 181 Accept ERN 182 Reject ERN 183 Accept ERN 184 Accept as marked ERN 185 Accept ERN 186 Accept ERN 187 Accept ERN 188 Accept ERN 189 Accept ERN 190 Accept ERN 191 Accept ERN 192 Accept ERN 193 Accept ERN 194 Accept ERN 195 Accept ERN 196 Accept as marked ERN 197 Accept ERN 198 Accept ERN 199 Accept ERN 200 Accept ERN 201 Accept ERN 202 Accept ERN 203 Accept ERN 204 Accept ERN 205 Accept ERN 206 Accept ERN 207 Accept ERN 208 Accept ERN 209 Accept as marked ERN 210 Accept ERN 211 OPEN ERN 212 Accept ERN 213 Accept ERN 214 Accept ERN 215 Accept ERN 216 Duplicate of 217 ERN 217 Accept ERN 218 Accept ERN 219 Accept ERN 220 Accept ERN 221 Accept ERN 222 Accept ERN 223 Accept ERN 224 Accept as marked ERN 225 Reject ERN 226 Reject ERN 227 Accept ERN 228 Accept ERN 229 Accept ERN 230 Accept ERN 231 Accept ERN 232 Accept ERN 233 Accept ERN 234 Accept ERN 235 Accept ERN 236 Accept ERN 237 Accept ERN 238 Accept ERN 239 Accept ERN 240 Accept as marked ERN 241 Accept as marked ERN 242 Accept ERN 243 Reject ERN 244 Accept as marked ERN 245 Accept as marked ERN 246 Accept ERN 247 Accept as marked ERN 248 Accept as marked ERN 249 Accept ERN 250 Accept as marked ERN 251 Reject ERN 252 Accept ERN 253 Accept ERN 254 Accept as marked ERN 255 Reject ERN 256 Accept ERN 257 Reject ERN 258 Accept as marked ERN 259 Accept ERN 260 Accept ERN 261 Accept ERN 262 Accept ERN 263 Accept ERN 264 Accept ERN 265 Accept as marked ERN 266 Accept as marked ERN 267 Duplicate of 263 ERN 268 Duplicate of 263 ERN 269 Duplicate of 263 ERN 270 Duplicate of 263 ERN 271 Duplicate of 263 ERN 272 Duplicate of 263 ERN 273 Accept ERN 274 Accept ERN 275 Accept ERN 276 Accept ERN 277 Accept ERN 278 Accept ERN 279 Accept ERN 280 Accept ERN 281 Accept ERN 282 Accept as marked ERN 283 Accept ERN 284 Accept ERN 285 Accept ERN 286 Accept ERN 287 Reject ERN 288 Accept ERN 289 Accept ERN 290 Accept ERN 291 Reject ERN 292 Accept ERN 293 Accept as marked ERN 294 Accept ERN 295 Accept ERN 296 Accept ERN 297 Accept ERN 298 Accept ERN 299 Accept ERN 300 Accept as marked ERN 301 Accept ERN 302 Accept ERN 303 Accept as marked ERN 304 Accept as marked ERN 305 Accept ERN 306 Accept ERN 307 Accept ERN 308 Accept as marked ERN 309 Accept ERN 310 Accept ERN 311 Accept ERN 312 Accept ERN 313 Accept ERN 314 Accept ERN 315 Accept ERN 316 Accept ERN 317 Accept ERN 318 Accept ERN 319 Accept ERN 320 Accept ERN 321 Accept ERN 322 Accept ERN 323 Accept ERN 324 Accept ERN 325 Accept ERN 326 Accept ERN 327 Accept ERN 328 Accept ERN 329 Accept ERN 330 Accept ERN 331 Accept ERN 332 Accept ERN 333 Accept ERN 334 Accept ERN 335 Accept ERN 336 Reject ERN 337 Accept ERN 338 Accept ERN 339 Accept ERN 340 Accept ERN 341 Accept ERN 342 Accept ERN 343 Accept ERN 344 Accept ERN 345 Accept ERN 346 Accept ERN 347 Accept ERN 348 Accept ERN 349 Accept ERN 350 Accept ERN 351 Accept ERN 352 Accept ERN 353 Accept ERN 354 Accept ERN 355 Accept ERN 356 Accept ERN 357 Accept ERN 358 Accept ERN 359 Accept ERN 360 Accept ERN 361 Accept ERN 362 Accept ERN 363 Accept ERN 364 Accept ERN 365 Accept ERN 366 Accept ERN 367 Accept ERN 368 Accept ERN 369 Accept ERN 370 Accept ERN 371 Accept ERN 372 Accept ERN 373 Accept ERN 374 Accept ERN 375 Accept ERN 376 Accept ERN 377 Accept ERN 378 Accept ERN 379 Accept ERN 380 Accept ERN 381 Accept ERN 382 Accept ERN 383 Accept ERN 384 Accept ERN 385 Accept ERN 386 Accept ERN 387 Accept ERN 388 Accept ERN 389 Accept ERN 390 Reject ERN 391 Accept ERN 392 Accept ERN 393 Accept as marked ERN 394 Accept ERN 395 Accept ERN 396 Accept ERN 397 Accept ERN 398 Accept ERN 399 Duplicate of 1 ERN 400 Accept ERN 401 Duplicate of 1 ERN 402 Reject ERN 403 Accept ERN 404 Accept as marked ERN 405 Accept ERN 406 Accept ERN 407 Accept ERN 408 Accept ERN 409 Accept ERN 410 Accept ERN 411 Accept ERN 412 Accept ERN 413 Accept ERN 414 Accept ERN 415 Accept as marked ERN 416 Accept ERN 417 Accept as marked ERN 418 Accept as marked ERN 419 Accept ERN 420 Accept as marked ERN 421 Reject ERN 422 Accept ERN 423 Accept ERN 424 Reject ERN 425 Accept ERN 426 Accept as marked ERN 427 Accept ERN 428 Accept as marked ERN 429 Accept ERN 430 Accept ERN 431 Accept ERN 432 Accept ERN 433 Accept ERN 434 Accept ERN 435 Accept as marked ERN 436 Accept ERN 437 Accept ERN 438 Accept as marked ERN 439 Accept as marked ERN 440 Accept as marked ERN 441 Accept as marked ERN 442 Accept ERN 443 Accept ERN 444 Accept ERN 445 Accept ERN 446 Accept ERN 447 Accept ERN 448 Accept ERN 449 Accept ERN 450 Accept ERN 451 Accept ERN 452 Accept ERN 453 Accept as marked ERN 454 Accept ERN 455 Accept ERN 456 Accept ERN 457 Accept ERN 458 Reject ERN 459 Accept ERN 460 Accept ERN 461 Accept as marked ERN 462 Accept ERN 463 Accept ERN 464 Accept ERN 465 Accept ERN 466 Accept ERN 467 Accept ERN 468 Accept ERN 469 Accept as marked ERN 470 Accept ERN 471 Accept ERN 472 Accept as marked ERN 473 Accept ERN 474 Accept ERN 475 Accept ERN 476 Accept ERN 477 Reject ERN 478 Accept as marked ERN 479 Accept ERN 480 Accept ERN 481 Accept ERN 482 Accept as marked ERN 483 Accept ERN 484 Reject ERN 485 Accept as marked ERN 486 Accept ERN 487 Accept as marked ERN 488 Reject ERN 489 Accept ERN 490 Accept ERN 491 Accept ERN 492 Reject ERN 493 Accept ERN 494 Accept ERN 495 Accept ERN 496 Accept ERN 497 Accept as marked ERN 498 Accept ERN 499 Accept ERN 500 Accept ERN 501 Accept as marked ERN 502 Accept as marked ERN 503 Accept ERN 504 Accept ERN 505 Accept as marked ERN 506 Accept ERN 507 Accept ERN 508 Accept ERN 509 Accept ERN 510 Accept ERN 511 Accept ERN 512 Accept ERN 513 Accept ERN 514 Accept ERN 515 Accept ERN 516 Accept as marked ERN 517 Accept _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 1 ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org Bug in XCUd5 (rdvk# 503) {aj.xcuinterps} Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:01:32 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 0 Line: 0 Section: many Problem: This is a reminder to track PASC 1003.2 interps 194-199 which are going thru their final comment period. Several of these have proposed edits(see notes to editors) on XCUd5, which if the interps are finalised "as is" should be applied. Action: If the interps are finalised apply the proposed edits. _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 2 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 14) [DST-67] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Based on reflector discussions AJ will wordsmith _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: xviii Line: 559 Section: Acknowledgements Problem: I presume the IEEE also acknowledges the same stuff. Action: Fix (per IEEE). _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 3 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 30) [DST-1535] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2217 Line: 150 Section: 1.7.1.3 Problem: Shallification Action: Access Permissions applies to all -> Access Permissions shall apply to all [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 4 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 31) [DST-1536] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2217 Line: 158 Section: 1.7.1.4 Problem: Shallification Action: the file is set to -> the file shall be set to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 5 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 32) [DST-1537] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2217 Line: 159 Section: 1.7.1.4 Problem: Shallification Action: the file is set to -> the file shall be set to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 6 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 33) [DST-1538] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2217 Line: 161 Section: 1.7.1.4 Problem: Shallification Action: the file are set to: -> the file shall be set to: [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 7 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 34) [DST-1539] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2217 Line: 165 Section: 1.7.1.4 Problem: Shallification Action: the process are cleared. If -> the process shall be cleared. If [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 8 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 35) [DST-1540] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2217 Line: 167 Section: 1.7.1.4 Problem: Shallification Action: the process are cleared. -> the process shall be cleared. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 9 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 15) [DST-68] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Keep lines 155-157 Keep lines 158-174 Replace lines around 175-193 with below Table N: File Types New Type Function Existing Type \ A B C D F L M P Q R S T creating NEW A fattached STREAM | oa fattach() B Block Special | oc mknod()** C Character Special | oc mknod()** D Directory | f f od mkdir() F FIFO Special file | f f of mkfifo() L Symbolic Link | FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL symlink() M Shared Mem | shm_open() P SemaPhore | sem_open() Q Message Queue | mq_open() R regular file | f f r open() S Socket | os bind() T Typed Memory | * NONE | n n n c n f: Fail (Text from point 1, line 177-180) (Note, the action is identical in point 3, so point 3 is not used here.) r: regular file (text from point 2) of: open fifo (text from point 4) c: create a new file as defined in 1.7.1.4 items 1-7 oa: STREAMS folks define (look closely at the OF case) <<<======== oc: The named file shall be opened with the consequences defined for that device. od: The directory shall be opened. FL: (Follow Link) symbolic links shall always be followed when a file is opened; the file named in the symbolic link shall be opened or created as above. <<<============== n: Create a new file as described by the appropriate function. -: The effect is implementation-defined unless specified by the utility description. *: there is no portable way to create a file of this type **: not portable _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 196 Section: Introduction Problem: Responding to the Reviewer's Note: Action: I believe the following matrix of file types and actions is a start. However, there are cases for which others may be able to do better. (Note... this is for the case of creating a new file; when opening "for read" things would be different.) (I chose the notation below for readability in 80-char ASCII lines, but I strongly recommend retaining this as a matrix (with possibly longer keys/mnemonics) so that it can and will be more effectively maintained. File Types: New Type Function Existing Type \ A B C D F L M P Q R S T opening NEW A fattached STREAM | oa ? B Block Special | ob mknod() C Character Special | oc mknod() D Directory | f f od mkdir() F FIFO Special file | f f of mkfifo() L Symbolic Link | FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL symlink() M Shared Mem | ? P SemaPhore | ? Q Message Queue | ? R regular file | f f r open() S Socket | os bind() T Typed Memory | e ? NONE | n n n c n The last column indicates the function used for the open operation on the NEW file type. (When typesetting, it might be possible to put these on the columns, where they really make more sense, but I think that having "old" as the column direction is better overall. Actions: f: Fail (Text from point 1, line 177-180) (Note, the action is identical in point 3, so point 3 is not used here.) r: regular file (text from point 2) of: open fifo (text from point 4) c: create a new file as defined in 158-174 According to the current text, all other cells in the table are implementation-defined, but these seem meaningful: oa: STREAMS folks define (look closely at the OF case) ob: The named file shall be opened with the implementation-defined consequences defined for that device. oc: The named file shall be opened with the consequences defined for that device. If the file identifies a tty or pty it shall behave as defined in this standard for those device types. od: The directory shall be opened; except where stated explicitly in this standard, further actions are unspecified. FL: (Follow Link) symbolic links are always followed on open; the file named (indirectly) in the symbolic link will be opened or created as above. n: Create a new file as described by the appropriate function. : An error (or possibly implementation defined) as far as I can tell. (NA may apply to a whole column in many of these case.) *: An error, but I'm sure there's normative text somewhere, but I haven't found it yet. Are there any additional combinations that we feel should be 'f' as a normative requirement? I suspect strongly so, like most of the other rows in the D and F columns. I personally feel that a table with a lot of whitespace (as long as it's given a meaning such as "error") is perfectly OK. It means we thought about all the cases. Clearly we hadn't because of all the new ox codes. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 10 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 36) [DST-1541] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 207 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: directory entry is removed from -> directory entry shall be removed from [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked take the change as above, also change line 206 "operation fails" to "operation shall fail"] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 11 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 37) [DST-1542] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 208 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: the file is decremented. -> the file shall be decremented. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 12 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 38) [DST-1543] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 211 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: the directory is freed and -> the directory shall be freed and [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 13 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 39) [DST-1544] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 212 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: the directory is no longer -> the directory shall be no longer [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 14 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 40) [DST-1545] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 213 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: directory contents are -> directory contents shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 15 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 41) [DST-1546] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 218 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: the file is freed and -> the file shall be freed and [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 16 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 42) [DST-1547] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 219 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: file is no longer accessible. -> file shall no longer be accessible. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 17 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 43) [DST-1548] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 220 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: file contents are preserved until -> file contents shall be preserved until [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 18 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 44) [DST-1549] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 222 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: st_ctime field is marked for -> st_ctime field shall be marked for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 19 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 45) [DST-1550] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2218 Line: 223 Section: 1.7.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: containing directory are marked for -> containing directory shall be marked for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 20 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 46) [DST-1551] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2219 Line: 238 Section: 1.7.1.7 Problem: Shallification Action: the value is one that -> the value shall be one that [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 21 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 47) [DST-1552] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2219 Line: 245 Section: 1.7.1.8 Problem: Shallification Action: Name Resolution, is used by -> Name Resolution, shall be used by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 22 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 48) [DST-1553] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2219 Line: 256 Section: 1.7.1.10 Problem: Shallification ("is assumed" is pretty wimpy). Action: Std 1003.1-200x is assumed to be available -> Std 1003.1-200x shall be available [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 23 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 49) [DST-1554] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2229 Line: 677 Section: 1.9 Problem: Shallification Action: {PATH_MAX}, also apply -> {PATH_MAX}, shall also apply [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 24 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 16) [DST-69] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Change sentence one to "As stated in 1.7.1.11, some functions are described in terms of equivalent functionality." Changes to sentence two the underlying operating system-> the implementation provides -> shall provide and all->including _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2232 Line: 779 Section: 1.11 Problem: This is directly redundant with similar text at 260. Action: Change to "As stated in 1.7.1.11, some functions are described in terms of equivalent functionality." I think that 1.7.1.11 is better wording. [Ed recommendation: NONE Does this mean just replacing the sentence starting on line 779? If so accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 25 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 50) [DST-1555] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2235 Line: 919 Section: 1.11 Problem: Shallification Action: The action is that inherited -> The action shall be that inherited [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 26 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 51) [DST-1556] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2235 Line: 921 Section: 1.11 Problem: Shallification Action: default action is that -> default action shall be that [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 27 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 17) [DST-70] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Add to this reviewers note and carry forward to D6 Note that "completely" here means no other output is permitted by the standard. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2235 Line: 934 Section: STDOUT Problem: What are we being asked to check for? (The note should stand alone if effective review is to occur.) Action: Clarify the action to read... ...check the STDOUT and OUTPUT sections of every utility to be sure that the assumption that the output is COMPLETELY described (no additions permitted) by these sections is valid. I would also suggest tweaking things to emphasize the (otherwise rather subtle) implication of "completely": Add: Note: "completely" here implies that no other output is permitted by the standard. [Ed recommendation: The group asked that this statement be added here. To me it reads please check for each utility, check for correctness....] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 28 Joseph S. Myers BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 496) [JSM-13] Sun, 11 Feb 2001 13:15:26 +0000 (GMT) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2242 Line: 1193-1194 Section: Double-Quotes Problem: The correction from POSIX.2 Interpretation 157 item B has not been applied. I quote the interpretation request and response (page and line references being to the joine IEEE/ISO/IEC version of IEEE Std 1003.2-1992 and ISO/IEC 9945-2:1993 (E), with corresponding references to the current draft in square brackets: ============================== Request ============================== B) 3.2.3 (Double Quotes) (page 118, lines 55 to 59) says, concerning the $( ... ) construct [page 2242, lines 1191-1194] The tokenizing rules in 3.3 shall be applied recursively to find the matching ). Does the reference to the tokenizing rules in 3.3 include alias substitution (3.3.1)? If so, then: (a) Is the expansion of an alias encountered included in the text of the command to be substituted (in place of the original text), despite the provision to the contrary in 3.3(5) (page 120, line 125)? [page 2244, line 1264] (b) May a ) in the value of the alias terminate the $( ... ) construct? (c) Is alias expansion also applied when and if command substitution is applied? (d) Since alias substitution requires recognition of reserved words in correct grammatical context, its application here requires parsing of the command whose output shall be substituted to occur in the process of finding the matching ). Is the behaviour in the event of a grammatical error defined (since recovery is necessary to continue to determine whether aliases should be substituted)? For example, may errors or diagnostics occur from the following? true || $(if; foo) If not, then: Is the reference to parsing of the command whose output is to be substituted in E.3.2 (page 823, line 2975) in error? [XRATd5 page 3515 line 9008] ============================== Response ============================== B. The standard appears to mandate that alias substituion should occur, however, concerns have been raised about this which are being referred to the sponsor. Historically shells have not done this, and the standard would appear to be in error. Notes to the editor (not part of this interpretation): ----------------------------------------------------- For item B above, add the phrase "other than alias substitution" on line 58-59 after "recursively" worded appropriately. ============================================================ Action: After "tokenizing rules" add "(other than alias substitution)". [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked Note from P1003.2b chair: I believe not including this change was an oversight of the P1003.2b working group. A fix would be to change "(on page 2243) shall be" on D5, P2242, L1194 to "(on page 2243), not including the alias substitutions in Section 2.3.1 (on page 2244), shall be". ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 29 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 52) [DST-1557] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2243 Line: 1216 Section: 2.3 Problem: Shallification Action: The shell reads its input -> The shell shall read its input [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 30 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 53) [DST-1558] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2243 Line: 1218 Section: 2.3 Problem: Shallification Action: These lines are parsed using -> These lines shall be parsed using [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 31 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 54) [DST-1559] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2243 Line: 1239 Section: 2.3 Problem: "Some systems may treat these as invalid arithmetic expressions instead of subshells." This should be rattionale; this is an observation, using reserved word "may". We're not granting permission, just observing something. Action: Move to rationale [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked I think we need to move lines 1235-1243 to the rationale for this section rewording the shall to should. This text was not in 1003.2 and commentary rather than requirement. The location in rationale is p3515 after line 9021 ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 32 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 55) [DST-1560] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2243 Line: 1241 Section: 2.3 Problem: "Certain combinations of characters are invalid in portable scripts, as shown in the grammar, and that some systems have assigned these combinations (such as "|&") as..." THe use of "that" is odd, and this has a large rationale component (which in this case can be saved). Action: "Certain combinations of characters are invalid in portable scripts, as shown in the grammar. Implementations may use these combinations (such as "|&") as..." [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked do the change but note that the previous rdvk proposes moving this rationale] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 33 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 56) [DST-1561] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2245 Line: 1319 Section: 2.4 Problem: "This reservation is to allow future implementations that support named labels for flow control." Action: This (but NOT the prior) sentence is rationale, and is nicely covered by "break". Add a footnote to the prior sentence: * See the break built-in for details. [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked Delete "This reservation....control" on line 1318-1319 This is covered in the rationale on p3516, line 9074-9075 ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 34 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 57) [DST-1562] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2246 Line: 1339 Section: 2.5.2 Problem: Shallification Action: positional parameter expands as a -> positional parameter shall expand as a [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 35 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 58) [DST-1563] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2246 Line: 1340 Section: 2.5.2 Problem: Shallification Action: first parameter is still joined with -> first parameter shall still be joined with [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 36 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 59) [DST-1564] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2246 Line: 1342 Section: 2.5.2 Problem: Shallification Action: parameter is still joined with -> parameter shall still be joined with [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 37 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 60) [DST-1565] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2246 Line: 1343 Section: 2.5.2 Problem: Shallification Action: of '@' generates zero fields, -> of '@' shall generate zero fields, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 38 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 61) [DST-1566] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2246 Line: 1345 Section: 2.5.2 Problem: Shallification Action: it expands to a -> it shall expand to a [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 39 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 62) [DST-1567] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2246 Line: 1350 Section: 2.5.2 Problem: Shallification Action: is not counted in -> shall not be counted in [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 40 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 63) [DST-1568] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2247 Line: 1386 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: HOME This variable shall be interpreted as the path name -> HOME The path name [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 41 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 64) [DST-1569] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2247 Line: 1393 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: LANG This variable shall provide a default value -> LANG The default value [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 42 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 65) [DST-1570] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2247 Line: 1398 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: LC_ALL This variable shall provide a default value -> LC_ALL The default value [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 43 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 66) [DST-1571] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2247 Line: 1401 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: LC_COLLATE This variable shall determine the behavior -> LC_COLLATE Determine the behavior [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 44 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 67) [DST-1572] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2247 Line: 1403 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: LC_CTYPE This variable shall determine the interpretation -> LC_CTYPE Determine the interpretation [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 45 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 68) [DST-1573] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1411 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: LC_MESSAGES This variable shall determine the language -> LC_MESSAGES Determine the language [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 46 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 69) [DST-1574] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1413 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: LINENO This variable shall be set by the -> LINENO Set by the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 47 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 70) [DST-1575] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1420 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: NLSPATH This variable shall determine the location -> NLSPATH Determine the location [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 48 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 71) [DST-1576] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1422 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: PATH This variable represents a string formatted -> PATH A string formatted [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 49 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 72) [DST-1577] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1425 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: PPID This variable shall be set by the -> PPID Set by the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 50 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 73) [DST-1578] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1436 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: "(Historically, the superuser has had a prompt of '#'.)" Technically, this is rationale. Action: Move to rationale (altho I don't find it too offensive, it probably breaks some rule somewhere.) [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked Delete this sentence here as it is already covered in rationale on p3519 ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 51 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 74) [DST-1579] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2248 Line: 1451 Section: 2.5.3 Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: PWD This variable shall be set by the -> PWD Set by the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 52 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 75) [DST-1580] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2249 Line: 1497 Section: 2.6.1 Problem: Shallification Action: the tilde-prefix is replaced by -> the tilde-prefix shall be replaced by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 53 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 76) [DST-1581] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2251 Line: 1567 Section: 2.6.2 Problem: Shallification Action: The word is expanded to -> The word shall be expanded to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 54 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 77) [DST-1582] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2251 Line: 1568 Section: 2.6.2 Problem: Shallification Action: parameter expansion then results in parameter, -> parameter expansion shall then result in parameter, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 55 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 78) [DST-1583] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2251 Line: 1571 Section: 2.6.2 Problem: Shallification Action: parameter expansion then results in parameter, -> parameter expansion shall then result in parameter, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 56 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 79) [DST-1584] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2251 Line: 1574 Section: 2.6.2 Problem: Shallification Action: parameter expansion then results in parameter, -> parameter expansion shall then result in parameter, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 57 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 80) [DST-1585] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2251 Line: 1577 Section: 2.6.2 Problem: Shallification Action: parameter expansion then results in parameter, -> parameter expansion shall then result in parameter, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 58 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 81) [DST-1586] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2253 Line: 1660 Section: 2.6.4 Problem: Shallification Action: The shell expands all tokens -> The shell shall expand all tokens [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 59 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 82) [DST-1587] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2254 Line: 1685 Section: 2.6.5 Problem: Use proper verb form. Action: delimiter and uses the delimiters -> delimiter and use the delimiters [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 60 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 83) [DST-1588] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2255 Line: 1740 Section: 2.7 Problem: Shallification Action: it, but does do so -> it, but shall do so [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 61 gwc@unisoft.com BUG in XCUd5 2.7.4 (rdvk# 502) {gwc here-document delimiter} Wed, 14 Feb 2001 18:12:47 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2256 Line: 1778 Section: 2.7.4 Problem: Another incorrect use of "line". Action: Change "line containing only the delimiter, with no trailing s" to "line containing only the delimiter and a , with no s in between". _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 62 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 84) [DST-1589] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2256 Line: 1784 Section: 2.7.4 Problem: Last I heard, here documents were read, not written and fd 0 was stdin. Action: to standard output (file descriptor -> to standard input (file descriptor [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 63 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 85) [DST-1590] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2257 Line: 1786 Section: 2.7.4 Problem: Shallification Action: here-document lines are not expanded. Otherwise, -> here-document lines shall not be expanded. Otherwise, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 64 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 86) [DST-1591] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2257 Line: 1807 Section: 2.7.5 Problem: Shallification (2 shalls) Action: is used to duplicate one input file descriptor from another, or to close one. -> shall duplicate one input file descriptor from another, or shall close one. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 65 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 87) [DST-1592] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2257 Line: 1816 Section: 2.7.6 Problem: Shallification (2 shalls) Action: is used to duplicate one output file descriptor from another, or to close one. -> shall duplicate one output file descriptor from another, or shall close one. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 66 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 88) [DST-1593] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: (or may exit) with a -> (respectively may) exit with a _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2258 Line: 1846 Section: 2.8.1 Problem: Not quite right as it stands. Action: (or may exit) with a -> (resp. may) exit with a _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 67 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 89) [DST-1594] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2259 Line: 1877 Section: 2.9 Problem: Shallification Action: a command is that of -> a command shall be that of [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 68 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 90) [DST-1595] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2259 Line: 1878 Section: 2.9 Problem: Shallification Action: There is no limit -> There shall be no limit [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 69 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 91) [DST-1596] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2259 Line: 1885 Section: 2.9.1 Problem: Shallification Action: and redirections are all performed from -> and redirections shall all be performed from [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 70 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 92) [DST-1597] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2259 Line: 1902 Section: 2.9.1 Problem: Shallification Action: assignment error occurs. See Section -> assignment error shall occur. See Section [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 71 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 93) [DST-1598] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2260 Line: 1933 Section: 2.9.1.1 Problem: Shallification Action: the command is searched for -> the command shall be searched for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 72 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 94) [DST-1599] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2260 Line: 1948 Section: 2.9.1.1 Problem: "along" adds nothing. Action: first operand, along with any -> first operand, with any _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 73 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 95) [DST-1600] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: arguments passed along. If the -> arguments, passed to the new shell. If the _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2261 Line: 1949 Section: 2.9.1.1 Problem: "passed along" is a bit too informal. Action: arguments passed along. If the -> arguments passed as arguments to the new shell. If the _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 74 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 96) [DST-1601] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: command execution, write an error message, and return -> command execution.In this case it shall write an error message, and shall return _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2261 Line: 1950 Section: 2.9.1.1 Problem: Shallification Action: command execution, write an error message, and return -> command execution, shall write an error message, and shall return _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 75 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 97) [DST-1602] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: first operand, with any remaining arguments, passed to the new shell _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2261 Line: 1967 Section: 2.9.1.1 Problem: "passed along" is a bit too informal. Action: first operand, along with any remaining arguments passed along. -> first operand, with any remaining arguments passed as arguments to the new shell. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 76 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 98) [DST-1603] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2264 Line: 2080 Section: 2.9.4.2 Problem: Shallification Action: for loop executes a sequence -> for loop shall execute a sequence [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 77 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 99) [DST-1604] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2264 Line: 2091 Section: 2.9.4.2 Problem: Shallification Action: is equivalent to: -> shall be equivalent to: [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 78 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 100) [DST-1605] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2267 Line: 2207 Section: 2.10.1 Problem: Shallification Action: These rules are used to -> These rules shall be used to _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 79 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 101) [DST-1606] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2274 Line: 2522 Section: 2.13.1 Problem: Shallification Action: single character match a -> single character shall match a [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 80 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 102) [DST-1607] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: (1) The slash character in a pathname shall be explicitly matched by using one or more slashes in the pattern; it shall neither be matched by the asterisk or question-mark special characters nor by a bracket expression. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2275 Line: 2564 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: "The application shall ensure that the slash character in a path name is explicitly matched by using one or more slashes in the pattern; it cannot be matched by the asterisk or question-mark special characters or by a bracket expression..." This paragraph slides around as to whether it's making requirements on the application or the implmentation. In reality, it's both: the simple "shall" describes BOTH what the implementation and the application are required to do... if the application wants a slash to match, it must code a slash, but also the implementation must honor that coding. Get rid of the TASA; shall works better. (That is, restore the original -1992 wording.) Action: (Note, 2 shalls.) "The the slash character in a path name shall be explicitly matched by using one or more slashes in the pattern; it shall not be matched by the asterisk or question-mark special characters or by a bracket expression." [Ed recommendation: NONE The wording proposed differs from 1003.2-1992, a cannot has now become a shall not (pattern; it cannot be matched...".] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 81 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 104) [DST-1609] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: withdrawn by originator _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2275 Line: 2565 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: Shallification Action: pattern; it cannot be matched -> pattern; it shall not be matched [Ed recommendation: NONE This is a cannot in 1003.2-1992] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 82 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 105) [DST-1610] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2275 Line: 2566 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: Shallification Action: the pattern are -> the pattern shall be _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 83 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 106) [DST-1611] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2275 Line: 2570 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: Shallification Action: open bracket is treated as -> open bracket shall be treated as _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 84 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 103) [DST-1608] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2275 Line: 2573 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: "If a file name begins with a period ('.'), the application shall ensure that the period is explicitly matched by using a period..." As for my prior objection (to line 2564), shall works better. (That is, restore the original -1992 wording.) Action: "If a file name begins with a period ('.'), the period shall be explicitly matched by using a period..." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 85 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 107) [DST-1612] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2276 Line: 2581 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: Shallification Action: Specified patterns are matched against -> Specified patterns shall be matched against _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 86 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 108) [DST-1613] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2276 Line: 2582 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: Shallification Action: pattern character requires read permission -> pattern character shall require read permission [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 87 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 109) [DST-1614] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2276 Line: 2584 Section: 2.13.3 Problem: Shallification Action: pattern character requires search permission. -> pattern character shall require search permission. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 88 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 110) [DST-1615] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2276 Line: 2597 Section: 2.14 Problem: Use the right word. Action: An implementation can choose to -> An implementation may choose to [Ed recommendation: Accept but note this is a "can" in 1003.2-1992 which appears incorrect as can is not for implementations but for applications] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 89 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 111) [DST-1616] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2276 Line: 2611 Section: 2.14 Problem: Shallification Action: discarded does not apply -> discarded shall not apply [Ed recommendation: Reject I believe the sentence construction is correct as is with the current shall placement on the last part of the sentence. An additional shall here seems inapproppriate.] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 90 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 112) [DST-1617] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2277 Line: 2620 Section: break Problem: "exited from"... ugh... Action: loops, the last enclosing loop shall be exited from. Execution shall -> loops, the outermost enclosing loop shall be exited. Execution shall [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 91 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 113) [DST-1618] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2281 Line: 2736 Section: continue Problem: Shallification Action: The default is equivalent to -> The default shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 92 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 114) [DST-1619] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2281 Line: 2737 Section: continue Problem: "last" is ambiguous... outermost is precise. Action: loops, the last enclosing loop -> loops, the outermost enclosing loop [Ed recommendation: NONE current wording as per 1003.2-1992] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 93 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 115) [DST-1620] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2297 Line: 3222 Section: set Problem: Shallification Action: This option is supported if -> This option shall be supported if [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked. Change to "This option shall be supported if the implementation supports the ...."] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 94 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 116) [DST-1621] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2298 Line: 3254 Section: set Problem: Shallification Action: This option is supported if -> This option shall be supported if [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked. Change to "This option shall be supported if the implementation supports the ...."] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 95 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 118) [DST-1623] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2299 Line: 3291 Section: set Problem: Shallification Action: The shell writes a message -> The shell shall write a message [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 96 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 119) [DST-1624] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2299 Line: 3293 Section: set Problem: Shallification Action: The shell writes its input -> The shell shall write its input [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 97 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 120) [DST-1625] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2299 Line: 3294 Section: set Problem: Shallification Action: The shell writes to standard -> The shell shall write to standard [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 98 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 121) [DST-1626] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2299 Line: 3297 Section: set Problem: Shallification Action: these options is off (unset) -> these options shall be off (unset) [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 99 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 117) [DST-1622] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2299 Line: 3303 Section: set Problem: The typesetinng for "--" on 3031 looks different than that on 3033, and from looking at the flat text, it does appear to be different. The whitespace between the -s should be visible without being excessive. (Or, just CW everywhere there's "computer text", and the problem will go away.) Action: [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked this is line 3301 accept the former remark] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 100 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 122) [DST-1627] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2305 Line: 3488 Section: times Problem: Shallification Action: of times correspond to -> of times shall correspond to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 101 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 123) [DST-1628] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2314 Line: 3751 Section: 3.1.3 Problem: Shallification Action: client, it assigns a batch -> client, it shall assign a batch [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 102 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 124) [DST-1629] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2314 Line: 3755 Section: 3.1.3 Problem: Shallification Action: batch job returns the batch -> batch job shall return the batch [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 103 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 125) [DST-1630] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2314 Line: 3758 Section: 3.1.3 Problem: Shallification Action: never changes. -> shall never change. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 104 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 126) [DST-1631] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: identifier does not always -> identifier need not _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3761 Section: 3.1.4 Problem: "need not"-ification. Action: identifier does not always -> identifier need not always _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 105 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 127) [DST-1632] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3763 Section: 3.1.4 Problem: "need not"-ification. Action: an implementation is not required to provide a -> an implementation need not provide a _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 106 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 129) [DST-1634] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: withdrawn by originator _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3779 Section: 3.1.5 Problem: Granting permission for something to be imperceptable seems a bit odd. Action: the effect may be imperceptible to -> the effect is often imperceptible to _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 107 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 130) [DST-1635] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3781 Section: 3.1.5 Problem: Shallification Action: the job aborts the job. -> the job shall abort the job. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 108 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 131) [DST-1636] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3783 Section: 3.1.5 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: The conformance document for an implementation shall list the reasons for rejecting the routing of a batch job. The conformance document shall indicate the reasons for which the routing should be retried later and the reasons for which the job should be aborted. -> The reasons for rejecting a batch job are implementation-defined. The reasons for which the routing should be retried later and the reasons for which the job should be aborted are also implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 109 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 132) [DST-1637] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3788 Section: 3.1.6 Problem: Shallification Action: The script is passed to the program as its -> The script shall be passed to the program as if from its [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked "The script shall be passed to the program as its" Its explicit that we do want the script to be passed as its standard input ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 110 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 133) [DST-1638] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3789 Section: 3.1.6 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: An implementation of the batch server may pass the script to the program by other means. The implementation shall document the alternate means in the conformance -> An implementation may pass the script to the program by other implementation-defined means. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 111 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 134) [DST-1639] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3794 Section: 3.1.6 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server executes eligible jobs -> batch server shall execute eligible jobs _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 112 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 135) [DST-1640] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3796 Section: 3.1.6 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server scans the execution -> batch server shall scan the execution _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 113 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 136) [DST-1641] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3799 Section: 3.1.6 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server opens the standard -> batch server shall open the standard _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 114 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 137) [DST-1642] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: exucuting the job shall send _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2315 Line: 3801 Section: 3.1.6 Problem: Shallification Action: the job is to send -> the job shall send _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 115 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 138) [DST-1643] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: managing the job shall _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2316 Line: 3808 Section: 3.1.7 Problem: Shallification Action: the job should send -> the job shall(?) send [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 116 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 139) [DST-1644] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2316 Line: 3811 Section: 3.1.8 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server aborts jobs for -> batch server shall abort jobs for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 117 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 128) [DST-1633] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: delete the para at lines 3815-3817 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2316 Line: 3817 Section: 3.1.9 Problem: "In order to access batch services, a user must have execute access to a batch client. For example, to use the command language interface defined in this section, the user must be able to execute the programs that embody those utilities." Huh? Either it's saying something that only a government (or patent?) lawyer could love about "you can do what you can do if you can do it", or I totally miss the point. Action: Just toss it. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 118 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 140) [DST-1645] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: This use of must is intended to be ordinary english _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2316 Line: 3820 Section: 3.1.9 Problem: Shallification Action: client runs must be authorized -> client runs shall be authorized [Ed recommendation: NONE This is one of those occasions when it seems "must" is the correct imperative statement] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 119 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 141) [DST-1646] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2316 Line: 3821 Section: 3.1.9 Problem: Shallification Action: batch job owns the job -> batch job shall own the job [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 120 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 142) [DST-1647] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Replace XBD definitions with: Batch Administrator A user that is authorized to modify all the attributes of queues and jobs and to change the status of a batch server. Batch Operator A user that is authorized to modify some, but not all, of the attributes of jobs and queues, and may change the status of the batch server. Replace lines 3836-3839 with a cross reference to these definitions (in style) _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2316 Line: 3836 Section: 3.1.10 Problem: Duplicates formal definitions in XBD. Action: Delete paragraph. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 121 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 143) [DST-1648] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2317 Line: 3847 Section: 3.2 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server provides batch services -> batch server shall provide batch services _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 122 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 144) [DST-1649] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: This is unnecessary given ERN 121 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2317 Line: 3848 Section: 3.2 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server provides a service -> batch server shall provide a service _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 123 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 145) [DST-1650] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: see ERN 121 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2317 Line: 3849 Section: 3.2 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server provides a deferred -> batch server shall provide a deferred _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 124 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 146) [DST-1651] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2317 Line: 3851 Section: 3.2 Problem: Shallification Action: request, it rejects the request. -> request, it shall reject the request. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 125 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 147) [DST-1652] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2317 Line: 3852 Section: 3.2 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server aborts the batch -> batch server shall abort the batch [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 126 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 148) [DST-1653] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2318 Line: 3878 Section: 3.2.1 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server changes the -> batch server shall change the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 127 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 149) [DST-1654] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Deemed to be an observation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2318 Line: 3895 Section: 3.2.1 Problem: Shallification Action: batch job cannot accept job -> batch job shall not accept job _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 128 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 150) [DST-1655] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2318 Line: 3902 Section: 3.2.1 Problem: Shallification Action: batch job is in either -> batch job shall be in either [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 129 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 151) [DST-1656] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Change line 3876 is always -> shall always be, several->the following _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2318 Line: 3909 Section: 3.2.1 Problem: Shallification Action: the job should be in -> the job shall(?) be in _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 130 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 152) [DST-1657] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The group feels it is described more fully in the q* utilities and does not want to make a change here that might cause a conflict. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2319 Line: 3923 Section: 3.2.1 Problem: "may" here doesn't seem to be granting permssion, but simply observing. However, I'm not sure. Ask batch folks. Action: batch job may be in -> batch job is in (OR) ... could be in _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 131 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 153) [DST-1658] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2319 Line: 3938 Section: 3.2.2.1 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: An implementation of the batch server may pass the script to the program by other means. The implementation shall document the alternate means in the conformance -> An implementation may pass the script to the program by other implementation-defined means. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 132 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 154) [DST-1659] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2321 Line: 4004 Section: 3.2.2.1 Problem: Shallification Action: batch server is controlled by -> batch server shall be controlled by _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 133 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 155) [DST-1660] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2323 Line: 4079 Section: 3.2.2.1 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: An implementation may define other hold types. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe any additional hold types, how they are specified, their internal representation, their behavior, and how they affect the behavior of other utilities. -> An implementation may define other hold types. Any additional hold types, how they are specified, their internal representation, their behavior, and how they affect the behavior of other utilities are implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 134 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 156) [DST-1661] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: change the sentence on 4111 These files (with implementation-defined names) shall be retained in the home directory of the user under whose user identifier the batch job is executed. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2324 Line: 4112 Section: 3.2.2.1 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: executed and the file names shall be the default file names for the files as defined in the conformance document for the implementation. -> -> executed and under implementation-defined file names. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 135 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 157) [DST-1662] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2326 Line: 4207 Section: 3.2.2.2 Problem: Use the right word. Action: batch server is allowed to delay the -> batch server may delay the _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 136 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 158) [DST-1663] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2326 Line: 4211 Section: 3.2.2.2 Problem: Use proper verb form. Action: destination is implementation-defined. -> destinations is implementation-defined. [Ed recommendation: Accept This is editorial at best] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 137 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 159) [DST-1664] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2327 Line: 4239 Section: 3.2.2.3 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: by other means, in which case the conformance document for the implementation shall document the method of notification. -> by other implementation-defined means. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 138 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 160) [DST-1665] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2327 Line: 4247 Section: 3.2.2.3 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: by other means, in which case the conformance document for the implementation shall document the method of notification. -> by other implementation-defined means _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 139 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 161) [DST-1666] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2327 Line: 4268 Section: 3.2.2.5 Problem: "activities" seems like the better word. Action: perform the services of Batch -> perform the activities of Batch [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked perform the actions of Batch] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 140 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 162) [DST-1667] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2328 Line: 4306 Section: 3.2.3.1 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Delete Batch Job Request for for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Delete Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Delete Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 141 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 163) [DST-1668] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2329 Line: 4313 Section: 3.2.3.1 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may send additional signals to the session leader of the job prior to sending the SIGKILL signal. The conformance document for such a batch server shall document the signals that are sent to the session leader. -> It is implementation-defined whether additional signals are sent to the session leader of the job prior to sending the SIGKILL signal. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 142 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 164) [DST-1669] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2329 Line: 4317 Section: 3.2.3.1 Problem: "activities" sounds better. Action: perform the services -> perform the activities [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked perform the actions] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 143 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 165) [DST-1670] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2329 Line: 4329 Section: 3.2.3.2 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Hold Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall document the reasons for which a Hold Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Hold Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 144 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 166) [DST-1671] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2329 Line: 4334 Section: 3.2.3.2 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: The conformance document shall describe what effect, if any, the hold will have on a batch job in the RUNNING state. -> The effects, if any, the hold will have on a batch job in the RUNNING state are implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 145 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 167) [DST-1672] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2329 Line: 4350 Section: 3.2.3.3 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Batch Job Message Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Batch Job Message Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Batch Job Message Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 146 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 168) [DST-1673] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2330 Line: 4362 Section: 3.2.3.4 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Batch Job Status Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Batch Job Status Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Batch Job Status Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 147 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 169) [DST-1674] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2330 Line: 4381 Section: 3.2.3.5 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Locate Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall document the reasons for which a Locate Batch Job Request may be rejected. -> A batch server may reject a Locate Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 148 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 170) [DST-1675] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2331 Line: 4394 Section: 3.2.3.6 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Modify Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Modify Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Modify Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 149 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 171) [DST-1676] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2331 Line: 4412 Section: 3.2.3.7 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server can reject a Move Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Move Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server can reject a Move Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 150 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 172) [DST-1677] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_152 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2331 Line: 4428 Section: 3.2.3.8 Problem: ?? Action: queue is unspecified shall select a -> queue is not specified shall select an implementation-defined _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 151 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 173) [DST-1678] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_152 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2331 Line: 4429 Section: 3.2.3.8 Problem: ?? Action: batch server. The -> batch server. [Ed recommendation: NONE The proposed change makes no sense, and has no problem sentence to assist further] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 152 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 174) [DST-1679] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2331 Line: 4430 Section: 3.2.3.8 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server requested to queue a batch job for which the queue is unspecified shall select a queue for the batch job. Such a queue is called the default queue of the batch server. The conformance document for the implementation shall document the means by which the batch server determines the default queue. A batch server requested to queue a batch job for which the queue is not specified shall select an implementation-defined queue for the batch job. Such a queue is called the default queue of the batch server. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 153 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 175) [DST-1680] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2332 Line: 4443 Section: 3.2.3.8 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Queue Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall document the reasons for which a Queue Batch Job Request may be rejected. -> A batch server may reject a Queue Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 154 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 176) [DST-1681] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2332 Line: 4464 Section: 3.2.3.9 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Batch Queue Status Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Batch Queue Status Request is rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Batch Queue Status Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 155 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 177) [DST-1682] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2333 Line: 4477 Section: 3.2.3.10 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Release Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall document the reasons for which a Release Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Release Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 156 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 178) [DST-1683] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2333 Line: 4494 Section: 3.2.3.11 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Rerun Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Rerun Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Rerun Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implemenation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 157 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 179) [DST-1684] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2333 Line: 4503 Section: 3.2.3.11 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: An implementation may indicate to the batch job owner that the batch job has been rerun. The conformance document for an implementation shall state whether the batch job owner is notified that a batch job is rerun, and if so, shall describe the means used. A batch server that reruns a batch job may send other signals to the session leader of the batch job prior to sending the SIGKILL signal. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe any other signals that may be sent. A batch server may preferentially select a rerun job for execution. The conformance document for an implementation shall state whether rerun jobs shall be selected for execution before other jobs. -> An implementation may indicate to the batch job owner that the batch job has been rerun. Whether and how the batch job owner is notified that a batch job is rerun is implementation-defined. A batch server that reruns a batch job may send other implemnation-defined signals to the session leader of the batch job prior to sending the SIGKILL signal. A batch server may preferentially select a rerun job for execution. Whether rerun jobs shall be selected for execution before other jobs is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 158 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 180) [DST-1685] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2334 Line: 4525 Section: 3.2.3.13 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. A batch server may reject a Server Shutdown Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall document the reasons for which a Server Shutdown Request may be rejected. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. A batch server may reject a Server Shutdown Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The reasons for which a Server Shutdown Request may be rejected are implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 159 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 181) [DST-1686] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2334 Line: 4542 Section: 3.2.3.14 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Server Status Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Server Status Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Server Status Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 160 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 182) [DST-1687] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2335 Line: 4556 Section: 3.2.3.15 Problem: We have a nice term for this, let's use it. Action: A batch server may reject a Signal Batch Job Request for other reasons. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the reasons for which a Signal Batch Job Request may be rejected. The conformance document for an implementation shall describe the method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action. -> A batch server may reject a Signal Batch Job Request for other implementation-defined reasons. The method used to determine whether the user of a client is authorized to perform the requested action is implementation-defined. _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 161 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 504) [DWC-9] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2340 Line: 4686 Section: admin Problem: (admin synopsis) The -e option is specified in the options section, but is missing from the synopsis section. Action: Change "[-d flag]" on P2340 L4686 to "[-d flag] [-e login]". Change "[-d flag]" on P2340 L4688 to "[-d flag] [-e login]" [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 162 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 1) [ukuug-d5-j1] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2340 Line: 4722 Section: admin Problem: The specification for the behaviour of the -r option implies that a level number is to be supplied. This is not the case. The number to be supplied is the SID of the initial delta in the file. This can include a level number as well as a release number. For example, 4.6 is a valid argument to the -r option. Action: Change "-r rel" in the left column of line 4722 to "-r SID". Change the text of the paragraph which follows to :- Specify the SID of the initial delta to be inserted. This SID shall be a trunk SID; that is, the branch and sequence numbers shall be zero or missing. The level number is optional, and defaults to 1. Append to the discussion of the "n" flag, after line 4768 on page 2341, During the initial creation of an SCCS file, the n flag may be ignored. That is, if the -r option is used to set the release number of the initial SID to a value greater than 1, null deltas need not be created for the "skipped" releases. _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 163 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 505) [DWC-10] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2341,2342,2343 Line: 4733,...,4855 Section: admin Problem: (admin options: shall wording) The word 'shall' should be used. Action: Change "The allowable flags and their values are" on P2341, L4732-4733 to "Implementations shall recognize the following flags and associated values". Change "serve as anchor" on P2341 L4765 to "shall serve as anchor". Change "so specified are" on P2342 L4791 to "so specified shall be". Change "Diagnostics occur if the" on P2342 L4807 to "A diagnostic message shall be written if the". Change "Appropriate error diagnostics are produced" on P2342 L4811-4812 to "If the newly computed checksum does not match the checksum in the SCCS file, a diagnostic message shall be written". Change "SCCS files are text files" on P2343 L4831 to "SCCS files shall be text files". Change "The file named" on P2343 L4832 to "The application shall assure that the file named". [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked for the last one, The application shall ensure that the file named] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 164 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 183) [DST-1688] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2342 Line: 4787 Section: admin Problem: Shallification Action: group ID is equivalent to -> group ID shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 165 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 184) [DST-1689] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_163 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2343 Line: 4831 Section: admin Problem: Shallification Action: SCCS files are text files -> SCCS files shall be text files [Ed recommendation: Duplicate of rdvk#505] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 166 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 185) [DST-1690] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2343 Line: 4832 Section: admin Problem: Shallification Action: name option-argument is a text -> name option-argument shall be a text _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 167 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 186) [DST-1691] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2348 Line: 4996 Section: ar Problem: Shallification Action: ar utility can be used to create and -> ar utility shall create and [Ed recommendation: Reject This sentence is describing what the user can use the utility for, its a statement of the capability not the requirement. Its optional whether a user use it or not. The wording is also exactly the same in the base document. The change thus seems unnecessary] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 168 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 187) [DST-1692] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2348 Line: 5001 Section: ar Problem: Shallification Action: archive file is printable. -> archive file shall be printable. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 169 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 188) [DST-1693] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2348 Line: 5004 Section: ar Problem: Shallification Action: symbol table is created in -> symbol table shall be created in [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 170 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 189) [DST-1694] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2348 Line: 5006 Section: ar Problem: Shallification Action: symbol table is rebuilt. The -> symbol table shall be rebuilt. The [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 171 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 190) [DST-1695] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2349 Line: 5051 Section: ar Problem: Shallification Action: the file is not extracted. -> the file shall not be extracted. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 172 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 191) [DST-1696] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2349 Line: 5052 Section: ar Problem: Shallification Action: the archive are -> the archive shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 173 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 192) [DST-1697] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2355 Line: 5276 Section: asa Problem: Use the right word. Action: have the same effect as the . -> be equivalent to . [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 174 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 193) [DST-1698] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2358 Line: 5373 Section: at Problem: Shallification Action: Users are permitted to -> Users shall be permitted to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 175 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 194) [DST-1699] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2358 Line: 5374 Section: at Problem: Shallification - this should sets an absolute requirement so it's a shall. Action: the user should be -> the user shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 176 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 195) [DST-1700] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2358 Line: 5375 Section: at Problem: Shallification Action: appropriate privileges is -> appropriate privileges shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 177 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 196) [DST-1701] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2358 Line: 5376 Section: at Problem: Shallification Action: global usage is permitted. The -> global usage shall be permitted. The [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 178 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 197) [DST-1702] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2358 Line: 5377 Section: at Problem: Shallification Action: at.deny files consist of -> at.deny files shall consist of [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 179 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 198) [DST-1703] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____OPEN Rationale for rejected or partial changes: defer to IEEE _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2361 Line: 5497 Section: at Problem: "A year_number is a four-digit number representing the year A.D.," Political Correctness. Action: Use C.E. ("Common Era"). (Yvette... is this required? I like A.D. better, but ...) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 180 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 199) [DST-1704] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2362 Line: 5569 Section: at Problem: Shallification Action: and /usr/lib/cron/at.deny contain user names, -> and /usr/lib/cron/at.deny shall contain zero or more user names, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 181 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 18) [DST-72] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2365 Line: 5676 Section: at Problem: "It is anticipated..." is now at best confusing. Action: Replace with: "The at funcitonality is useful in simple environments, but in large or complex situations, the functionality provided by the Batch Services option is more suitable." [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 182 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 200) [DST-1705] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: withdrawn by originator _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6052 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: where OFMT is used); "%.6g" -> where OFMT shall be used); "%.6g" _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 183 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 201) [DST-1706] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6053 Section: awk Problem: Make list style consistent. Action: ENVIRON The variable ENVIRON is an array representing -> ENVIRON An array representing [Ed recommendation: Accept this is editorial] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 184 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 202) [DST-1707] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6056 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: array element is a string -> array element shall beis a string [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked array element is a string -> array element shall be a string] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 185 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 203) [DST-1708] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6067 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: the value is the name -> the value shall be the name _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 186 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 204) [DST-1709] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6070 Section: awk Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: the value is zero. -> the value shall be zero. Inside an END action the value is the number -> Inside an END action the value shall be the number [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 187 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 205) [DST-1710] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6075 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: action, NF retains the value -> action, NF shall retain the value [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 188 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 206) [DST-1711] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2374 Line: 6076 Section: awk Problem: Parenthetical needs a comma. Action: unless a subsequent redirected, getline -> unless a subsequent, redirected, getline _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 189 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 207) [DST-1712] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2375 Line: 6079 Section: awk Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: the value is zero. -> the value shall be zero. Inside an END action the value is the number -> Inside an END action the value shall be the number [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 190 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 208) [DST-1713] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2375 Line: 6088 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: of RS is the input -> of RS shall be the input [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 191 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 209) [DST-1714] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2375 Line: 6091 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: blank lines do not -> blank lines shall not [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 192 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 210) [DST-1715] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2375 Line: 6092 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: a is -> a shall [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 193 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 211) [DST-1716] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2375 Line: 6093 Section: awk Problem: This sentence no verb. Action: always a field -> always be a field [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 194 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 212) [DST-1717] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2375 Line: 6095 Section: awk Problem: Shallification Action: 1. This is always equivalent to -> 1. This shall always be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 195 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 213) [DST-1718] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2377 Line: 6158 Section: awk Problem: Ugly "the". Action: FS is the , skip -> FS is , skip [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 196 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 214) [DST-1719] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Go with Ed _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2378 Line: 6207 Section: awk Problem: "The application shall ensure that statements in a statement list are separated by s or semicolons, and are executed sequentially in the order that they appear." Hmmm... the application can assure the correctness of the implementation how? By running a validation suite every time that assures that the statements are executed in the proper order? Shall is much better. Action: "Statements in a statement list shall be separated by s or semicolons, and shall be executed sequentially in the order that they appear." [Ed recommendation: none, an alternative is to split this into two, the application requirement followed by the implementation requirement: "The application shall ensure that statements in a statement list are separated by s or semicolons. Statements in a statement list shall be executed sequentially in the order that they appear." ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 197 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 215) [DST-1720] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2381 Line: 6318 Section: awk Problem: Recast into the style of the list and "style". Action: int(x) Truncate its argument to an integer. It shall be truncated toward 0 -> int(x) Return the argument truncated to an integer. Truncation shall be toward 0 [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 198 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 216) [DST-1721] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2382 Line: 6365 Section: awk Problem: "n" probably hasn't gone missing from the alphabet, but it can be omitted. Action: n is missing, or if -> n is omitted, or if [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 199 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 217) [DST-1722] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2382 Line: 6393 Section: awk Problem: "omitted" is better. Action: var is missing, $0 and -> var is omitted, $0 and [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 200 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 218) [DST-1723] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2383 Line: 6413 Section: awk Problem: "omitted" is better. Action: var is missing, $0 and -> var is omitted, $0 and [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 201 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 219) [DST-1724] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2403 Line: 7298 Section: batch Problem: Shallification Action: Users are permitted to -> Users shall be permitted to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 202 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 220) [DST-1725] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2403 Line: 7299 Section: batch Problem: Shallification - sets a requirement (on at.whatever). Action: the user should be -> the user shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 203 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 221) [DST-1726] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2403 Line: 7300 Section: batch Problem: Shallification Action: appropriate privileges is -> appropriate privileges shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 204 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 222) [DST-1727] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2403 Line: 7301 Section: batch Problem: Shallification Action: global usage is permitted. The -> global usage shall be permitted. The [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 205 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 223) [DST-1728] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2403 Line: 7302 Section: batch Problem: Shallification Action: at.deny files consist of -> at.deny files shall consist of [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 206 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 224) [DST-1729] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2403 Line: 7311 Section: batch Problem: Shallification Action: and /usr/lib/cron/at.deny contain user names, -> and /usr/lib/cron/at.deny shall contain zero or more user names, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 207 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 19) [DST-73] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2424 Line: 8128 Section: c99 Problem: Serious typo. Wrong bracketing, makes "optlevel" a required arg. Action: "[-O]optlevel" -> "[-O optlevel]" [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 208 ajosey@opengroup.org Bug in XCUd5 c99 (rdvk# 12) {aj.jan8.3} Mon, 8 Jan 2001 12:08:43 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2427 Line: 8274 Section: c99 Problem: The libraries as currently defined will mean that Advanced Realtime functions should be located when given the -l c operand. Consider making the functions located in part of the -l rt option. Action: Add to the list on line 8274 and line 8286 _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 209 ajosey@opengroup.org Bug in XCUd5 c99 (rdvk# 11) {aj.c99.jan8} Mon, 8 Jan 2001 12:08:43 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Replace "and those functions marked with an RT extension in and ." with functions marked as extensions other than as part of the MF or MPR extensions in , functions marked as ADV in and functions marked as part of the CS, CPT and TMR options in . The same change would also need to be made on line 8286 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2427 Line: 8276 Section: c99 Problem: Its no longer correct to refer to "those functions marked as an RT extension". We should be explicit with the function names or refer to them a different way. Action: Replace "and those functions marked with an RT extension in and ." with functions marked as extensions other than as part of the MF or MPR extensions in , and functions marked as part of the CS, CPT and TMR extensions in . The same change would also need to be made on line 8286 _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 210 ajosey@opengroup.org Bug in XCUd5 c99 (rdvk# 13) {aj.jan8.2} Mon, 8 Jan 2001 12:08:43 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Problem statement should have referred to "Trace" not "Advanced Realtime" _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2427 Line: 8285 Section: c99 Problem: The libraries as currently defined will mean that Advanced Realtime functions should be located when given the -l c operand. Consider making the functions located in their own operand so they could be located in a separate library. Action: Add paragaph alphabetically -l trace This operand shall make visible all functions referenced in . An implementation may search this library in the absence of this operand. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 211 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 225) [DST-1730] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____OPEN Rationale for rejected or partial changes: to IEEE _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2433 Line: 8499 Section: cal Problem: Note that: cal 83 refers to A.D. 83, not 1983. Action: "Common Era", again. Yvette? _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 212 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 226) [DST-1731] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2434 Line: 8519 Section: cat Problem: Shallification Action: cat utility reads files in sequence and writes their contents -> cat utility shall read files in sequence and shall write their contents [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 213 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 227) [DST-1732] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2439 Line: 8721 Section: cd Problem: Shallification Action: operand, this is equivalent to -> operand, this shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 214 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 228) [DST-1733] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2442 Line: 8830 Section: cflow Problem: Shallification Action: integer are ignored. -> integer shall be ignored. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 215 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 230) [DST-1735] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2442 Line: 8838 Section: cflow Problem: Shallification Action: The listing is also sorted in -> The listing shall also be sorted in [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 216 Joseph S. Myers BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 28) [JSM-11] Sat, 3 Feb 2001 18:04:53 +0000 (GMT) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_217 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Dup of 217 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2442 Line: 8843-8844 Section: cflow Problem: The cflow specification refers to "run through the first pass of lint". lint, a LEGACY utility in Issue 5, is not present in this draft. Action: Replace the wording with an description of what the first pass of lint is supposed to be. Since the word "pass" does not appear in the lint specification in Issue 5, I don't however know what such wording would be. Or simply remove ", and then run through the first pass of lint" if suitable wording can't be established. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 217 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 229) [DST-1734] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Recommend Accept _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2442 Line: 8844 Section: cflow Problem: "... and then run through the first pass of lint." The lint command is not part of this standard, and besides it specifies implementation. The following bit about assembler files seems odd. Action: Replace with: ... File names suffixed by .l shall be taken to be lex input, .y as yacc input, .c as C99 source, and .i as the output of c99 -E. These shall be processed appropriately to their format. Files suffixed in .s (conventionally assembler source) may have more limited information extracted from them. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 218 Joseph S. Myers BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 27) [JSM-12] Sat, 3 Feb 2001 18:06:00 +0000 (GMT) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2444 Line: 8900-8918 Section: cflow Problem: The example program is not a valid C99 program, since it uses implicit int and implicit function declarations. Action: Replace the program by int i; int f(); int g(); int h(); int main() { f(); g(); f(); } int f() { i = h(); } and the output by 1 main: int(), 2 f: int(), 3 h: <> 4 i: int, 5 g: <> [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 219 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 231) [DST-1736] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2455 Line: 9340 Section: chown Problem: "owner[:group] A user ID and optional group ID to be assigned to file. The application shall ensure that the owner portion of this operand is a user name from the user database or a numeric user ID." So the application is required to check that the owner id is actually in the user database before calling chown. That's a bit difficult from the shell (but I guess it's possible if you write a C application.) Action: Just restore the shall. "The owner and group IDs shall..." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 220 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 232) [DST-1737] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2455 Line: 9341 Section: chown Problem: Shallification Action: user ID to be given -> user ID which shall be given _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 221 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 233) [DST-1738] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2455 Line: 9343 Section: chown Problem: Shallification Action: user name is used as -> user name shall be used as _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 222 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 234) [DST-1739] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2455 Line: 9346 Section: chown Problem: Shallification Action: to be given -> which shall be given _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 223 jeffcope@microsoft.com bug in xcu (rdvk# 494) [JLC-3] Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:33:04 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2475 Line: 10077 Section: compress Problem: Lempel-Ziv is only one of the patents involved. Action: Add the additional sentence: "Lempel-Ziv-Welch compression is covered by US Patent 4558302, issued to Terry A Welch on December 10th, 1985, and assigned to Sperry Corporation." [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 224 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 235) [DST-1740] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Do the change and then indent the next two paragraphs _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2478 Line: 10194 Section: cp Problem: ":" just seems better. Action: named as follows. -> named as follows: [Ed recommendation: None. We think this is right but need to know whether the next three paras need indenting? or ?] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 225 wollman@lcs.mit.edu Bug in XCUd5 cp (rdvk# 499) {GAW-9} Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:30:03 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The group observed that the wording is from the base document, and that the rules for pathname resolution apply here as elsewhere. We agree that if you feel that a change is required that an interpretation be filed to bring this into scope. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2479 Line: 10249 Section: cp Problem: What result does the following sequence of actions have (assuming the current directory is empty): $ touch foo $ ln -s baz bar $ cp foo bar What if we change it to: $ touch foo $ ln -s baz bar $ cp -f foo bar The specification states: a. If dest_file exists, the following steps shall be taken: Does a dangling symbolic link ``exist'', for the purposes of this condition? The fundamental question here is whether an implementation should use stat() or lstat() to determine whether dest_file exists. Action: Two possible rewordings: a. If dest_file exists, and if dest_file is a symbolic link the target of that link exists, the following steps shall be taken: or alternatively, a. If dest_file exists, the following steps shall be taken. If dest_file is a symbolic link, these steps shall be taken regardless of whether the target of that link exists. This may require an interpretation. _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 226 wollman@lcs.mit.edu Bug in XCUd5 cp (rdvk# 500) {GAW-8} Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:04:59 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: We believe the ability to copy ACLs is presently allowed under the general concept of Extended Security Controls in XBD 4.3 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2481 Line: 10318 Section: cp Problem: Sentence scans poorly. Action: Replace: Other, implementation-defined, bits with: Additional implementation-defined permissions Note that wording it in this way also clearly allows `cp -p' to preserve non-mode-bit file permissions, such as ACLs, which I believe is the expected behavior in the presence of such an extension. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 227 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 236) [DST-1741] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2486 Line: 10515 Section: crontab Problem: Shallification Action: Users are permitted to -> Users shall be permitted to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 228 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 237) [DST-1742] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2486 Line: 10517 Section: crontab Problem: Shallification - the at.whatever files again. Action: should be denied -> shall be denied [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 229 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 238) [DST-1743] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2486 Line: 10518 Section: crontab Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: privileges is allowed to submit a job. -> privileges shall be allowed to submit a job. If only cron.deny exists and is empty, global usage is -> If only cron.deny exists and is empty, global usage shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 230 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 239) [DST-1744] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2487 Line: 10561 Section: crontab Problem: Shallification Action: and /usr/lib/cron/cron.deny contain user names, -> and /usr/lib/cron/cron.deny shall contain zero or more user names, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 231 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 240) [DST-1745] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2497 Line: 10899 Section: ctags Problem: "On systems that do not support the FORTRAN Development Utilities option, ctags produces unspecified results for FORTRAN source code files. It should write to standard error a message identifying this condition and cause a non-zero exit status to be produced." No similar 'should' for C above? Action: Add at 10890: "It should write to standard error a message identifying this condition and cause a non-zero exit status to be produced." [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 232 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 241) [DST-1746] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2497 Line: 10910 Section: ctags Problem: ?? Action: the same locales -> the same locale [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 233 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 242) [DST-1747] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2497 Line: 10911 Section: ctags Problem: Use the right word. Action: as those in effect -> as that in effect [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 234 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 244) [DST-1749] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2503 Line: 11140 Section: cxref Problem: Shallification Action: #define lines is included in -> #define lines shall be included in [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 235 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 245) [DST-1750] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2503 Line: 11142 Section: cxref Problem: Shallification Action: Each symbol contains an asterisk -> Each symbol shall contain an asterisk [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 236 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 243) [DST-1748] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2503 Line: 11147 Section: cxref Problem: The -D -I and -U options should be mentioned as list items. Action: Add: -I Identical to C99 -D Identical to C99 -U Identical to C99 [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 237 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 246) [DST-1751] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2504 Line: 11184 Section: cxref Problem: Shallification Action: the listing starts with the -> the listing shall start with the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 238 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 247) [DST-1752] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2504 Line: 11186 Section: cxref Problem: Shallification Action: name line is followed by -> name line shall be followed by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 239 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 248) [DST-1753] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2507 Line: 11266 Section: date Problem: Shallification Action: locale, this is equivalent to -> locale, this shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 240 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 506) [DWC-11] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2508 Line: 11323-11331 Section: date Problem: (Format) The format for specifying the date to set: mmddhhyymm[[cc]yy] indicates cc and yy are optional. The description explicitly states yy is optional. It also describes behavior if cc is not set, and yy is set. However, the description does not specify behavior if neither cc nor yy are set. Note XCU4.2 (p.247 date command), stated: The current year is the default if yy is omitted. Action: Add to the end of the paragraph on P2508, L11331: The current year is the default if yy is omitted. Add a note to the change history saying this clarification was made. [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked as per action, add to CH A clarification is made such that the current year is the default if the yy argument is omitted when setting the system date and time.] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 241 gwc@unisoft.com BUG in XCUd5 century (rdvk# 492) {gwc century1} Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:02:09 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2510 Line: 11389 Section: date Problem: I can see what this is trying to say, but the way it says it is just confusing. Action: Replace A century is not calculated as an ordinal number; IEEE Std 1003.1-200x was published in century 20, not the twenty-first with The century number is calculated as the year divided by 100 and truncated to an integer; it should not be confused with the use of ordinal numbers for centuries (e.g. "twenty-first century") The paragraph this is in also appears at line 11467 under the heading "RATIONALE". One of the two paragraphs should be deleted, and the correction should be made to the one that remains. [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked Make the change in the action to p 2510 line 11389 Delete repetition on page 2511 lines 11467-11471 ] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 242 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 507) [DWC-12] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2512 Line: 11475 Section: date Problem: (date: See Also) The See Also section lists ctime(). However, ctime() is not affected by the locale settings such as LC_TIME. The strftime() interface, which is affected by LC_TIME, should be referenced instead. Note also the Rationale lines 11458-11460 mentions "... the ISO C standard strftime() function, on which many date implementations are based ...". Action: Replace "ctime()" with "strftime()" in the See Also list. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 243 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 249) [DST-1754] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The wording is as per the base document 1003.2b, confirming the intent _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2513 Line: 11518 Section: dd Problem: 4. If the swab conversion is specified, each pair of input data bytes shall be swapped. If there is an odd number of bytes in the input block, the last byte in the input record shall not be swapped. Line 11511 says padding is read in "as if" it came from the input. It would seem that rule 4 is inoperative if sync is specified. Action: I think this is what's intended; I'm not at all sure what might be intended if sync is specified. If there is an odd number of bytes in the input block, and the sync conversion was not specified, the last byte in the input record shall not be swapped. _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 244 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 508) [DWC-13] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2522 Line: 11787,11798,11812,11817 Section: delta Problem: (shall wording) Editorial error. The word 'shall'/'would' should be used. Also at P2523 L11833,11836 P2524 L11866,11868 Action: Change "is necessary only if two or more" on L11787 to "shall be necessary only if two or more" Change "This is used" on L11798 to "This shall be used" Change "prompt for a comment) is" on L11812 to "prompt for a comment) shall be" Change "character terminates the comment text" on L11817 to "character shall terminate the comment text" Change "A file operand is specified as '-'" on L11833 "A file operand shall be specified as '-'" Change "the results are unspecified" on L11836 "the results shall be unspecified" Change "Used only for" on L11866 "Shall be used only for" Change "Any SCCS files updated are files" on L11868 "Any SCCS files updated shall be files" [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked As above, except for the proposed change on line 11836 where the existing text is correct, the results are unspecified, we keep unspecified items in the present tense] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 245 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 2) [ukuug-d5-j2] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: add this here and at 11804. Change 11803-11804: MRs in a list shall be separated by s or escaped s. An unescaped shall terminate the MR list. The escape character is . _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2522 Line: 11817 Section: delta Problem: Discussion of the -y option talks about an "unescaped newline" without revealing what the escape character is. This page should specify it. Action: Add at line 11817, The escape character is . _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 246 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 4) [ukuug-d5-j4] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2523 Line: 11832 Section: delta Problem: "mrlist or a command" should be "mrlist or a comment", since the -m option introduces an MR list and the -y option introduces a comment. Action: In line 11832, change "command" to "comment". _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 247 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 5) [ukuug-d5-j5] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below__X__ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Make the change, Add to change history: Wording clarifying the use of "-" as a file argument and the use of STDIN is added as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2523 Line: 11833 Section: delta Problem: Use of "-" as file argument is incompatible with the the use of STDIN to accept MR lists and comments. An example error message given by one SCCS implementation is :- "ERROR: standard input specified w/o -y and/or -m keyletter (de16)" This should be pointed out or defined by the document. Action: After line 11833, add "In this case, the -y option must be used to specify the comment, and if the SCCS file has the v flag set, the -m option must also be used to specify the MR list." At line 11800, after 'If -m is not used', add the words 'and "-" is not specified as a file argument'. At line 11814, after 'If -y is not specified', add the words 'and "-" is not specified as a file argument'. _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 248 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 3) [ukuug-d5-j3] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: do as suggested, but also add "The standard action shall be taken for all other signals, see 1.11 (on p2231)." Add to Change History The ASYNCHRONOUS EVENTS section is updated to remove the implicit requirement that implementations re-signal themselves when catching a normally-fatal signal as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2523 Line: 11854 Section: delta Problem: Just saying "default" is slightly misleading. Although delta does indeed catch normally-fatal signals and do cleanup before exiting, existing implementations don't re-signal themselves, they just exit. Consider this example from Solaris 2.6:- $ delta s.foo ; echo return value is $? MRs? ^Creturn value is 1 $ A similar scenario may apply with many of the other SCCS tools, but since most of them don't prompt for input, it is harder to catch them with a signal, so I can't say for sure. Action: Change "Default" to "If SIGINT is caught, temporary files shall be cleaned up and delta shall exit with a non-zero exit code." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 249 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 250) [DST-1755] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2525 Line: 11907 Section: df Problem: Shallification Action: the output contains the total -> the output shall contain the total [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 250 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 251) [DST-1756] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: change and move sentence two to the end of the para for the para at 12061 The behavior of diff on other file types is implementation-defined when found in directories. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2529 Line: 12062 Section: diff Problem: "If both file1 and file2 are directories, diff shall not compare block special files, character special files, or FIFO special files to any files and shall not compare regular files to directories." There are now several more file types (not counting implementation- defined ones, or ones that the standard handwaves about (memory objects)). Action: "If both file1 and file2 are directories, diff shall compare only regular files to each other. Other implementation-defined file may be compared." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 251 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 252) [DST-1757] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The group felt the existing wording was sufficient _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2529 Line: 12073 Section: diff Problem: "The input files may be of any type." See line 12062. Action: "Although input files may be of any type, only regular files (and possibly additional implementation-defined file types) are read and compared." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 252 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 253) [DST-1758] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2544 Line: 12591 Section: echo Problem: Shallification Action: a follows the -> a shall follow the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 253 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 254) [DST-1759] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2552 Line: 12947 Section: ed Problem: "alternately" is the right word. Action: alternatively shall turn -> alternately shall turn _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 254 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 509) [DWC-14] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Option 2 below _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2553 Line: 12979-12982 Section: ed Problem: (ed: Extended Description: List Command) In most places in the ed extended description talking about a backslash character and an escaped character, it is described as the character "preceded by a backslash", or as a "backslash- pair". Here it is described as "backslash/". This could easily be misinterpreted as a three character sequence consisting of a backslash character, a slash character, and a newline character. Action: Change "backslash/ on P2553, L12979 to "backslash- pair" or to " preceded by a backslash". _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 255 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 20) [DST-74] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: this is the correct term as per ISO 646 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2573 Line: 13780 Section: ex Problem: The term "vertical-line character" is undefined. I suspect that there's a proper name for this character (and it may be that, but I don't think so). Action: Use the 10646 term, and copy it to XBD definitions. (Or use '|', which is OK with me, if clearly typeset.) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 256 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 255) [DST-1760] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2594 Line: 14600 Section: ex Problem: Use the right word. Action: stty) shall have the same affect as the suspend -> stty) shall be equivalent to the suspend [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 257 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 256) [DST-1761] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: After discussion it was felt that the change in ERN258 was sufficient . _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2654 Line: 16890 Section: file Problem: 1. If the file is not a regular file, its file type shall be identified. The file types directory, FIFO, block special, and character special shall be identified as such. Other implementation- ... This omits sockets, fattached streams, and other whatnot. Action: "File types other than regular files shall be identified as such." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 258 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 257) [DST-1762] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Add "socket" to "FIFO," on line 16889 and Socket socket to table 4-8 after FIFO _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2655 Line: 16952 Section: file Problem: The values for are unspecified, except that in the POSIX locale, if file is identified as one of the types listed in the following table, shall contain (but is not limited to) the corresponding string. fattach, socket? Action: Add: Socket Socket Fattached Stream Stream _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 259 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 258) [DST-1763] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2679 Line: 17876 Section: fuser Problem: "Interleaved" is the more precise term. Action: interspersed so that -> interleaved so that [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 260 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 259) [DST-1764] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2682 Line: 17954 Section: gencat Problem: The application shall ensure that the format of a message text source file is defined as follows. And the application checks the standard (the definition of how a message text file is formatted) how? Action: The content of a message text file shall be in the format defined as follows. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 261 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 260) [DST-1765] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2683 Line: 18011 Section: gencat Problem: Shallification Action: which is equivalent to: -> which shall be equivalent to: [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 262 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 510) [DWC-15] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2684 Line: 18038 Section: get Problem: (usage problem) The option letter 'n' is missing. Action: Change "[-begkmlLpst]" on L18038 to "[-begkmnlLpst]" [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 263 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 511) [DWC-16] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2684 Line: 18043,18059 Section: get Problem: (shall usage) Editorial error. The word 'shall'/'would' should be used. Also at: P2685 L18086,18090,18098,18100,18106 P2686 L18127,18159,18161 P2687 L18163,18167,18160,18172,18173,18176,18177,18178 18181,18182,18199,18200,18201,18204,18205 P2688 L18209,18212,18216,18217,18219 Action: Change "The generated text is" on L18043 to "The generated text shall be" Change "date-time are included" on L18059 to "date-time shall be included" Change "SIDs are interpreted as" on L18086 to "SIDs shall be interpreted as" Change "The -k option is implied" on L18090 to "The -k option shall be implied" Change "dissapears." on L18098 to "shall dissapear." Change "error) remain" on L18100 to "error) shall remain" Change "The format is:" on L18106 to "The format shall be:" Change "The SCCS files are" on L18127 to "The SCCS files shall be" Change "included deltas are listed" on L18159 to "included deltas shall be listed" Change "excluded deltas are listed" on L18161 to "excluded deltas shall be listed" Change "output consists of" on L18163 to "output shall consist of" Change "it includes all" on L18167 to "it shall include all" Change "file name is" on L18160 to "file name shall be" Change "files are named by" on L18172 to "files shall be named by" Change "g-file is an exception" on L18173 to "g-file shall be an exception" Change "is created in the current" on L18176 to "shall be created in the current" Change "g-file is created" on L18177 to "g-file shall be created" Change "It is owned by" on L18178 to "It shall be owned by" Change "l-file contains a table" on L18181 to "l-file shall contain a table" Change "l-file is created" on L18182 to "l-file shall be created" Change "blank line terminates" on L18199 to "blank line shall terminate" Change "p-file is used" on L18200 to "p-file shall be used" Change "contents are also used" on L18201 to "contents shall be also used" Change "It is writable" on L18204 to "It should be writable" Change "p-file has the following" on L18205 to "p-file shall have the following" Change "and uses the format" on L18209 to "and shall use the format" Change "uses the format" on L18212 to "shall use the format" Change "The z-file serves as" on L18216 to "The z-file shall serve as" Change "Its contents are the" on L18216 to "Its contents shall be the" Change "The z-file is created" on L18217 to "The z-file shall be created" Change "p-file apply for the" on L18219 to "p-file shall apply for the" _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 264 gwc@unisoft.com BUG in XCUd5 century (rdvk# 493) {gwc century2} Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:02:09 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2684 Line: 18055-18057 Section: get Problem: Avoid contentious use of "century" (particularly "20th century" and "21st century" if inclusion/exclusion of year 2000 is implied.) Action: Replace lines 18055-18057 with the following (based on the "date" page): For the YY component, values in the range [69-99] shall refer to years 1969 to 1999 inclusive, and values in the range [00-68] shall refer to years 2000 to 2068 inclusive. Likewise replace: page 2952 line 28558-28560 section prs editorial with the same text as above. [Ed recommendation: Accept do both here and on p 2952] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 265 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 7) [ukuug-d5-j7] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: delete last sentence on 18086, and add to the previous ",except that the result of supplying a partial SID is unspecified." Add to Change History The EXTENDED DESCRIPTION section is updated to make partial SID handling unspecified, reflecting common usage, and to clarify SID ranges as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. (note CH also covers ERN 266) _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2685 Line: 18086 Section: get Problem: Contrary to the statements in lines 18084 to 18086, I can find no evidence that partial SIDs are used to select SIDs according to the rules laid out in EXTENDED DESCRIPTION. For example (Solaris 2.6) :- $ get -i"1.3.2.3" s.foo Included: 1.3.2.3 3.2 4 lines No id keywords (cm7) $ cat foo hi This line added in 3.2 This line added in 1.3.2.3. $ get -i"1.3.2" s.foo Included: 3.2 2 lines No id keywords (cm7) $ cat foo hi This line added in 3.2 $ Action: Delete lines 18084 to 18086. _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 266 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 6) [ukuug-d5-j6] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Accept as marked, add as new sentence at end of the para A diagnostic message shall be written if the first SID in the range is not an ancestor of the second SID in the range. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2685 Line: 18086 Section: get Problem: SID ranges are underspecified. The discussion of the on line 18083 doesn't indicate what combinations are valid. The remarks in lines 18084 to 18086 would appear to imply that any valid SID is accepted, but this is not the case. I am not aware of the full extent of the conditions applied to this, but I know that at least, if the SID specified after the '-' is on a branch, the SID specified on the left of the '-' must be one of its ancestors. Disobeying this rule results in an error message. Viz:- $ get -i"1.3.2.4" s.foo Included: 3.1 1 lines No id keywords (cm7) $ get -i"1.3.1.1-1.3.2.4" s.foo Included: ERROR [s.foo]: bad range (co12) Action: Add at line 18086: The SID on the left of the '-' must be an ancestor of the SID on the right of the '-'. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 267 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 261) [DST-1766] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_263 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2686 Line: 18159 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: included deltas are listed following -> included deltas shall be listed following [Ed recommendation: DUP] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 268 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 262) [DST-1767] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_263 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2686 Line: 18161 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: excluded deltas are listed following -> excluded deltas shall be listed following [Ed recommendation: DUP] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 269 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 263) [DST-1768] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_263 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18163 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: standard output consists of the -> standard output shall consist of the [Ed recommendation: DUP] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 270 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 264) [DST-1769] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_263 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18172 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: auxiliary files are named by -> auxiliary files shall be named by [Ed recommendation: DUP] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 271 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 265) [DST-1770] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_263 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18176 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: generated text, is created in -> generated text, shall be created in [Ed recommendation: DUP] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 272 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 266) [DST-1771] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_263 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18177 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: A g-file is created in -> A g-file shall be created in [Ed recommendation: DUP] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 273 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 267) [DST-1772] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18178 Section: get Problem: Shallification (x 2), make sure "it" is clear. Action: It is owned by the real user. -> It shall be owned by the real user. If the -k option is used or implied, it is writable by -> If the -k option is used or implied, the g-file shall be writable by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 274 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 268) [DST-1773] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18179 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: otherwise, it is read-only. -> otherwise, it shall be read-only. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 275 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 269) [DST-1774] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18182 Section: get Problem: Shallification (2 shalls) Action: The l-file is created in the current directory if the -l option is used; it is read-only and it is -> The l-file shall be created in the current directory if the -l option is used; it shall be read-only and [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 276 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 270) [DST-1775] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18184 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: the l-file have the -> the l-file shall have the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 277 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 271) [DST-1776] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18199 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: terminates each entry. -> shall terminate each entry. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 278 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 272) [DST-1777] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18204 Section: get Problem: Shallification (note deletion of "is" for proper grammar). Action: directory. It is writable by owner only, and it is owned by -> directory. It shall be writable by owner only, and owned by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 279 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 273) [DST-1778] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2687 Line: 18205 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: the p-file has the following -> the p-file shall have the following [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 280 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 274) [DST-1779] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2688 Line: 18215 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: no two lines can have the -> no two lines shall have the _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 281 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 275) [DST-1780] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2688 Line: 18219 Section: get Problem: Shallification Action: the p-file apply for the z-file. -> the p-file shall apply to the z-file. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 282 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 8) [ukuug-d5-j8] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below__X__ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: 1. (get) Add a new subsection "System Date and Time" before line 18256 on page 2689. The text of this subsection should be :- When a g-file is generated, the creation time of deltas in the SCCS file may be taken into account. If any of these times are apparently in the future, the behavior is unspecified. Add to Application Usage Problems can arise if the system date and time have been modified (for example put forward and then back again, or unsynchronized clocks across a network) and can also arise when different values of the TZ environment variable are used. Problems of a similar nature can also arise for the operation of the delta utility, which compares the previous file body against the working file as part of its normal operation. 2. (delta) Add a new subsection "System Date and Time" within the (currently empty) "EXTENDED DESCRIPTION" section of the delta utility. The text of this subsection should be :- When a delta is added to an SCCS file, the system date and time shall be recorded for the new delta. If a get is performed using an SCCS file with a date recorded apparently in the future the behavior is unspecified. Add to App Usage Problems can arise if the system date and time have been modified (for example put forward and then back again, or unsynchronized clocks across a network) and can also arise when different values of the TZ environment variable are used. Problems of a similar nature can also arise for the operation of the get utility, which records the date and time in the file body. 3. (delta and get) Add TZ to the end of the ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES section for the delta and get utilities (near line 11852, 18143), delta: TZ Determine the timezone in which the time and date are written in the SCCS file. If the TZ variable is unset or NULL an unspecified system default timezone is used. get: TZ Determine the timezone in which the times and dates written in the SCCS file are evaluated. If the TZ variable is unset or NULL an unspecified system default timezone is used. Add to CH for get New text is added to EXTENDED DESCRIPTION and APPLICATION USAGE regarding how the system date and time may be taken into account, and the TZ environment variable is added to ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. Add to CH for delta New text is added to EXTENDED DESCRIPTION and APPLICATION USAGE regarding how the system date and time may be taken into account, and the TZ environment variable is added to ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2689 Line: 18255 Section: get Problem: If one or more of the deltas in the SCCS file appears to have been created in the future, some implementations of SCCS will fail to retrieve the lines added in that delta. Likewise, they may fail to omit lines delted in that delta. This kind of problem only occurs if the SCCS file has been modified by hand (in which case it serves the perpetrator right) or if the system clock has ever been put back (i.e. while the clock was 'forward', a new delta was checked in). This kind of thing is quite common in certain kinds of software testing, in which the behaviour of the system at some future date is tested. A similar apparent effect can be created by the use of environment variables controlling the local time zone, because the times stored in the SCCS file are in local time. Action: 1. (get) Add a new subsection "System Date and Time" before line 18256 on page 2689. The text of this subsection should be :- When a g-file is generated, the creation time of deltas in the SCCS file may be taken into account. If any of these times are apparently in the future, the behaviour is unspecified. This situation can arise if the system date and time have been modified (for example put forward and then back again) and can also arise through use of the TZ environment variable when the delta utility is invoked on an SCCS file. Problems of a similar nature can also arise for the operation of the delta utility, which compares the previous file body against the working file as part of its normal operation. 2. (delta) Add a new subsection "System Date and Time" within the (currently empty) "EXTENDED DESCRIPTION" section of the delta utility. The text of this subsection should be :- When a delta is added to an SCCS file, the system date and time is recorded for the new delta. If the system date and time is manipulated in such a way as to set the system date and time back to a value which is apparently before a time recorded in an SCCS file, the delta and get utilities shall behave in an unspecified way for that SCCS file. A similar situation can be brought about through the use of the TZ environment variable. 3. (delta) Add at the foot of the ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES section for the delta utility (near line 11852), an entry for the environment variable TZ. Add as the text for this entry:- Determine the timezone in which the date and time of the creation of a delta is recorded within the SCCS file (the creation time of deltas is recorded in local time). 4. (date) On page 2510, add at the foot of the APPLICATION USAGE section for the date command (near line 11415), the following text :- Setting the system time and date back by a significant amount can cause unexpected behaviour on the part of some programs, for example the get utility. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 283 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 276) [DST-1781] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2697 Line: 18531 Section: getopts Problem: Shallification Action: getopts utility can be used to retrieve options -> getopts utility shall retrieve options [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 284 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 277) [DST-1782] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2703 Line: 18772 Section: grep Problem: Shallification Action: -q Quiet. Do not write anything to the -> -q Quiet. Nothing shall be written to the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 285 curtis.smith@simtrol.com Bug in XCUd5 grep examples (rdvk# 501) {2} Wed, 14 Feb 2001 20:40:07 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2705 Line: 18867-18875 Section: grep Problem: example lines are split where vertical bar should appear Action: Merge split example lines to the following: lines 18867/18868 becomes single line grep -E 'abc|def' lines 18869/18870 becomes single line grep -F 'abc|def' lines 18872/18873 becomes single line grep -E '^abc$|^def$' lines 18874/18875 becomes single line grep -F -x 'abc|def' [Ed recommendation: Accept] (note example 3 was updated by AJ 2001-03-13) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 286 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 278) [DST-1783] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2713 Line: 19112 Section: iconv Problem: Shallification Action: The semantics are equivalent to -> The semantics shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 287 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 279) [DST-1784] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The group understands that automated testing is unreasonable in this context, but could not agree on how to get the wording better (especially without a global search and destroy for system reboot). System Reboot is defined in XBD. The pre-first use condition need not be detectable, or re-enterable. This is also material coming from a base doc with no interpretation to bring a change into scope. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2723 Line: 19469 Section: ipcs Problem: "If the corresponding facility is not installed or has not been used since the last reboot, then the report shall be written out in the format:" This overspecifies the implementation, in that there's no conformance reason I can to not to allow the implementation to either always behave as if it has been used, or to reset it to "idle" if it wishes. There are also some testability issues: if init uses these features, the requirement may be met that it looks as specified just after a reboot, but it's never detectable. If the system DID do a reset, the testsuite would have to know a lot about the history of the system. (Besides, reboot is a concept the standard has tried to stay away from as much as it can, and this is a place where it can.) Action: "If the corresponding facility is not installed or is in a 'reset' state then the report shall be written out in the format below. How the facility enters the 'reset' state is unspecified." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 288 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 280) [DST-1785] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2732 Line: 19813 Section: join Problem: "By default"... If file1 and file2 are not as required, join won't work. Say that. Action: By default, the files file1 and file2 should be ordered -> The files file1 and file2 shall be ordered _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 289 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 281) [DST-1786] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2733 Line: 19847 Section: join Problem: Shallification (as for line 19813) Action: sequence should be the -> sequence shall be the _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 290 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 282) [DST-1787] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2737 Line: 20031 Section: kill Problem: Shallification Action: process group are signaled. -> process group shall be signaled. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 291 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 283) [DST-1788] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The group felt that should was correct here, see XRAT for should _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2737 Line: 20033 Section: kill Problem: Shallification -- requirement on the application. Action: negative, it should -> negative, it shall _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 292 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 284) [DST-1789] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2742 Line: 20239 Section: lex Problem: Shallification Action: input file contains lex source -> input file shall contain lex source [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 293 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 285) [DST-1790] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2742 Line: 20242 Section: lex Problem: Shallification Action: resulting program reads character input -> resulting program shall read character input [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked resulting program shall read character input and shall partition it into ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 294 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 286) [DST-1791] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2743 Line: 20245 Section: lex Problem: Shallification (2 shalls) Action: was matched is left in yytext as a null-terminated string; yytext is either -> was matched shall be left in yytext as a null-terminated string; yytext shall be either [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 295 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 287) [DST-1792] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2743 Line: 20249 Section: lex Problem: Shallification Action: int yyleng is set to -> int yyleng shall be set to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 296 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 288) [DST-1793] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2743 Line: 20250 Section: lex Problem: Shallification Action: or action, is executed. -> or action, shall be executed. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 297 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 289) [DST-1794] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2748 Line: 20501 Section: lex Problem: Shallification Action: character read is -> character read shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 298 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 290) [DST-1795] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2749 Line: 20507 Section: lex Problem: Shallification Action: following functions appear only -> following functions shall appear only [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 299 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 291) [DST-1796] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2749 Line: 20510 Section: lex Problem: Word order. Action: yywrap( ) always shall return 1. -> yywrap( ) shall always return 1. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 300 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 292) [DST-1797] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: replace sentence 1 at 20727: In the first synopsis form, the ln utility shall create a new directory entry (link) at the destination path specified by the target_file operand. If the -s option is specified, a symbolic link shall be created for the file specified by the source_file operand. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2755 Line: 20728 Section: ln Problem: comma Action: option is specified a symbolic -> option is specified, a symbolic _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 301 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 293) [DST-1798] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2772 Line: 21377 Section: lp Problem: The fact that lp without -c doesn't necessarily copy shouldn't require it NOT to copy... the current wording says "are", which is implicitly a "shall". It should be a "may", granting permission to the implementation, and warning the application. Action: is printed are reflected in -> is printed may be reflected in [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 302 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 294) [DST-1799] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2778 Line: 21623 Section: ls Problem: Shallification Action: GID numbers are written, rather -> GID numbers shall be written, rather [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 303 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 295) [DST-1800] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2778 Line: 21625 Section: ls Problem: Shallification Action: the group is not written. -> the group shall be not written. [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked] [the group is not written. -> the group shall not be written.] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 304 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 491) [DST-1996] Tue, 6 Feb 2001 22:07:20 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: "Sort with the primary key being time modified (most recently modified first) and the secondary key being file name in the collating sequence." _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2778 Line: 21633 Section: ls Problem: "Sort by time modified before sorting...". If you interpret "before" as temporal, the sort described is the same as sort | sort which makes the list appear to be in name order. If you interpret "before" as "a more primary key", then the result would be by time, which is what is clearly intended. (Note... "operands" is wrong... what if it's a directory or recursive.) Action: "Sort with the primary key being time modified (most recently modified first) and the secondary key of file name in the collating sequence." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 305 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 296) [DST-1801] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2780 Line: 21708 Section: ls Problem: Bad capital "I". Action: -l forms, If -> -l forms, if [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 306 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 297) [DST-1802] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2783 Line: 21846 Section: ls Problem: Use the right word. Action: Implementations are allowed to make -q -> Implementations may make -q [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 307 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 298) [DST-1803] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2786 Line: 21941 Section: m4 Problem: Use proper posessive. Action: the macros defining text, -> the macro's defining text, [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 308 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 299) [DST-1804] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2786 Line: 21969 Section: m4 Problem: Need sentence break. Action: acute accent (''') see -> acute accent ('''). See [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked insert a semi colon? do as per editorial convention] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 309 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 301) [DST-1806] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21974 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: m4 utility makes available the -> m4 utility shall make available the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 310 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 302) [DST-1807] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21975 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: Their values are null unless -> Their values shall be null unless [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 311 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 303) [DST-1808] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21978 Section: m4 Problem: ?? Action: numeric built-in macro arguments shall be -> numeric arguments to built-in macros shall be _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 312 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 304) [DST-1809] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21981 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: changecom macro sets the begin-comment -> changecom macro shall set the begin-comment [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 313 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 305) [DST-1810] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21982 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: comment mechanism is disabled. With -> comment mechanism shall be disabled. With [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 314 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 306) [DST-1811] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21983 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: argument becomes the begin-comment string and the becomes the -> argument shall become the begin-comment string and the shall become the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 315 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 307) [DST-1812] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21984 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: first argument becomes the begin- -> first argument shall become the begin- [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 316 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 308) [DST-1813] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21985 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: second argument becomes the end-comment -> second argument shall become the end-comment [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 317 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 309) [DST-1814] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21986 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: Systems support comment -> Systems shall support comment [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 318 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 310) [DST-1815] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21987 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: changequote macro sets the begin-quote -> changequote macro shall set the begin-quote [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 319 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 311) [DST-1816] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21988 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: quote strings are set to -> quote strings shall be set to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 320 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 312) [DST-1817] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21989 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: that argument becomes the begin-quote -> that argument shall become the begin-quote [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 321 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 313) [DST-1818] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21990 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: becomes the end-quote string. -> shall become the end-quote string. With two arguments, the first argument becomes -> With two arguments, the first argument shall become [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 322 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 314) [DST-1819] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21991 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: second argument becomes the end-quote -> second argument shall become the end-quote [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 323 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 315) [DST-1820] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21992 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: Systems support quote -> Systems shall support quote [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 324 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 316) [DST-1821] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21993 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: decr macro is its first argument decremented by 1. -> decr macro shall be its first argument decremented by 1. It is an -> It shall be an [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 325 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 317) [DST-1822] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21995 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: second argument is specified as the defining -> second argument shall become the defining [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 326 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 318) [DST-1823] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 21997 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defn macro is the quoted -> defn macro shall be the quoted [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 327 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 319) [DST-1824] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22001 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: buffers is written to -> buffers shall be written to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 328 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 320) [DST-1825] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22002 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: diverts future output -> shall divert future output [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 329 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 321) [DST-1826] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22003 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: of 0 resumes the normal -> of 0 shall resume the normal [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 330 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 322) [DST-1827] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22004 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: to 9 is discarded. -> to 9 shall be discarded. It is an error -> It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 331 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 323) [DST-1828] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22006 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: divnum macro is the number -> divnum macro shall be the number [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 332 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 324) [DST-1829] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22010 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: dumpdef macro writes the defined -> dumpdef macro shall write the defined [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 333 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 325) [DST-1830] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22012 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: errprint macro writes its arguments -> errprint macro shall write its arguments [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 334 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 326) [DST-1831] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22013 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: eval macro evaluates its first -> eval macro shall evaluate its first [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 335 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 327) [DST-1832] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22014 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: C-language operators are supported, except -> C-language operators shall be supported, except [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 336 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 300) [DST-1805] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: The 32bit has been here since XPG2 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2787 Line: 22014 Section: m4 Problem: "The eval macro evaluates its first argument as an arithmetic expression, using 32-bit signed integer arithmetic." Overspecified. We carefully avoid integer word size elsewhere. Action: "The eval macro shall evauate its first argument as an arithmetic expression, using signed integer arithmetic corresponding to the C-language type." (Or "corresponding to the C-language type intleast_32_t or wider type." if we want to say at least 32 bits.) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 337 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 328) [DST-1833] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22027 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: operators. It is an error -> operators. It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 338 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 329) [DST-1834] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22028 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: and associativity are as in C. -> and associativity shall be as in C. Systems support octal -> Systems shall support octal [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 339 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 330) [DST-1835] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22029 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: if specified, sets the radix -> if specified, shall set the radix [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 340 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 331) [DST-1836] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22030 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: if specified, sets the minimum -> if specified, shall set the minimum [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 341 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 332) [DST-1837] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22031 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: result. It is an error -> result. It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 342 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 333) [DST-1838] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22033 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defining text is the second -> defining text shall be the second [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 343 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 334) [DST-1839] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22034 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defining text is the third -> defining text shall be the third [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 344 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 335) [DST-1840] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22038 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defining text is the third -> defining text shall be the third [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 345 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 336) [DST-1841] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22043 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: the result is the third -> the result shall be the third [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 346 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 337) [DST-1842] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22044 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defining text is null. If -> defining text shall be null. If [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 347 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 338) [DST-1843] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22045 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: remains, it becomes the defining -> remains, it shall become the defining [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 348 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 339) [DST-1844] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22046 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: the process is repeated with -> the process shall be repeated with [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 349 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 340) [DST-1845] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22047 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: a warning is -> a warning shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 350 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 341) [DST-1846] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22050 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: second arguments are repeated for -> second arguments shall be repeated for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 351 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 342) [DST-1847] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22051 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defining text is the argument -> defining text shall be the argument [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 352 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 343) [DST-1848] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22052 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: otherwise, it is null. -> otherwise, it shall be null. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 353 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 344) [DST-1849] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22053 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: include macro is the contents -> include macro shall be the contents [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 354 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 345) [DST-1850] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22054 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: argument. It is an error -> argument. It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 355 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 346) [DST-1851] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22055 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: incr macro is its first argument incremented by 1. -> incr macro shall be its first argument incremented by 1. It is an -> It shall be an [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 356 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 347) [DST-1852] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22057 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: index macro is the first -> index macro shall be the first [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 357 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 348) [DST-1853] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22060 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: len macro is the length -> len macro shall be the length [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 358 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 349) [DST-1854] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22062 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: It is an error -> It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 359 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 350) [DST-1855] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22064 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: first argument is processed when -> first argument shall be processed when [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 360 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 351) [DST-1856] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2788 Line: 22065 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: arguments specified are processed in -> arguments specified shall be processed in [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 361 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 352) [DST-1857] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22067 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: defining text is the first -> defining text shall be the first [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 362 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 353) [DST-1858] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22069 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: popdef macro deletes the current -> popdef macro shall delete the current [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 363 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 354) [DST-1859] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22072 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: pushdef macro is identical to -> pushdef macro shall be identical to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 364 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 355) [DST-1860] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22073 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: preserves any current -> shall preserve any current [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 365 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 356) [DST-1861] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22074 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: shift macro is all of -> shift macro shall be all of [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 366 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 357) [DST-1862] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22075 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification (2 shalls in the sentence) Action: sinclude macro is identical to the include macro, except that it is not an error -> sinclude macro shall be identical to the include macro, except that it shall not be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 367 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 358) [DST-1863] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22077 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: substr macro is the substring -> substr macro shall be the substring [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 368 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 359) [DST-1864] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22081 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: become the defining text. -> shall become the defining text. It is not an error -> It shall not be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 369 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 360) [DST-1865] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22082 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: the first argument and the defining text is null. -> the first argument, in this case the defining text shall be null. It is an error -> It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 370 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 361) [DST-1866] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22084 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: syscmd macro interprets its first -> syscmd macro shall interpret its first [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 371 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 362) [DST-1867] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22085 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: defining text is the string result of that command. -> defining text shall be the string result of that command. No output redirection is -> No output redirection shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 372 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 363) [DST-1868] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22088 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: sysval macro is the exit -> sysval macro shall be the exit [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 373 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 364) [DST-1869] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22090 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: traceon macro enables tracing for -> traceon macro shall enable tracing for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 374 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 365) [DST-1870] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22091 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: trace output is written to -> trace output shall be written to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 375 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 366) [DST-1871] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22093 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: traceoff macro disables tracing for -> traceoff macro shall disable tracing for [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 376 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 367) [DST-1872] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22095 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: translit macro is the first -> translit macro shall be the first [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 377 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 368) [DST-1873] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22098 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: undefine macro deletes all definitions -> undefine macro shall delete all definitions [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 378 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 369) [DST-1874] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22102 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: Undiverting discards the -> Undiverting shall discard the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 379 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 370) [DST-1875] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2789 Line: 22103 Section: m4 Problem: Shallification Action: It is an error -> It shall be an error [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 380 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 371) [DST-1876] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2793 Line: 22237 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: user commands are -> user commands shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 381 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 372) [DST-1877] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2793 Line: 22241 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: (' ')) affect processing -> (' ')) shall affect processing [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 382 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 373) [DST-1878] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2797 Line: 22382 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: point, mailx is in input -> point, mailx shall be in input [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 383 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 374) [DST-1879] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2797 Line: 22383 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: input mode is also entered when -> input mode shall also be entered when [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 384 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 375) [DST-1880] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2797 Line: 22403 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: state that affects how they -> state that shall affect how they [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 385 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 376) [DST-1881] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2797 Line: 22405 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: current message, marked by -> current message, which shall be marked by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 386 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 377) [DST-1882] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2797 Line: 22415 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: All messages are -> All messages shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 387 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 378) [DST-1883] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2799 Line: 22498 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: and quoting also apply. -> and quoting shall also apply. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 388 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 379) [DST-1884] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2799 Line: 22501 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: components match are treated as -> components match shall be treated as [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 389 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 380) [DST-1885] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2805 Line: 22727 Section: mailx Problem: Shallification Action: Both forms override the -> Both forms shall override the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 390 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 381) [DST-1886] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject__X__ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Withdrawn by originator _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2810 Line: 22912 Section: mailx Problem: "In the following descriptions, the application shall ensure that the argument command ..." I find it rather unlikely that mailx would be used in this form by an application. A user, yes. Action: "In the following descriptions, the argument command shall ..." (Or "the user shall", but...) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 391 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 382) [DST-1887] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2816 Line: 23147 Section: make Problem: Shallification Action: make utility can be used as a part of software development to update files -> make utility shall update files [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 392 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 383) [DST-1888] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2816 Line: 23149 Section: make Problem: Shallification Action: relationships and updates those derived -> relationships and shall update those derived [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 393 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 512) [DWC-17] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2816 Line: 23162 Section: make Problem: (shall usage) Minor editorial problem. The word "shall" is missing. Action: Change "makefile:" on L23162 to "makefile shall:" [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked do the above, change Includes to Include on line 23163 Omits to Omit on line 23164] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 394 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 513) [DWC-18] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2817 Line: 23222 Section: make Problem: (Editorial) Need to add a sentence to be consistent with other sections. Action: Change Add the following sentence at the end of L23222. "See the EXTENDED DESCRIPTION section." [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 395 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 514) [DWC-19] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2820 Line: 23330 Section: make Problem: (shall usage) Editorial error. The word 'shall'/'would' should be used. Action: Change "it terminates" on L23330 to "it shall terminate". Change "These modify the way" on L23333 to "These shall modify the way". Change "make treats" on L23388 to "make shall treat". Change "make assumes" on L23391 to "make shall assume". Change "make automatically issues" on L23395 to "make automatically shall issue". Change "make does not" on L23397 to "make shall not" Change "The .a suffix refers to" on L23535 to "The .a suffix shall refer to" Change "rule is used to" on L23536 to "rule shall be used to" Change "$< macro is" on L23581 to "$< macro shall be" Change "the meaning is changed to" on L23589 to "the meaning shall be changed to" Change "macros are defined as" on L23594 to "macros shall be defined as" [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 396 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 384) [DST-1889] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2848 Line: 24449 Section: more Problem: Shallification (note verb change) Action: screen, more does not scroll the screen, but instead redraws -> screen, more shall not scroll the screen, but instead redraw [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 397 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 385) [DST-1890] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2848 Line: 24451 Section: more Problem: Shallification Action: the screen is cleared. -> the screen shall be cleared. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 398 Joseph S. Myers BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 497) [JSM-15] Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:49:05 +0000 (GMT) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2849 Line: 24471 Section: more Problem: The usage "different than" is sometimes objected to and grates gratuitously for some readers of English. Action: Here and also at page 2933 line 27785 section pax editorial Change "different than" to "different from". _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 399 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 386) [DST-1891] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_1 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2849 Line: 24485 Section: more Problem: "If the tag specifies a line number, the first line of the display shall contain the..." Action: This was the third line in -1992 (intentionally). This has been submitted as part of the IR about the first vs. third line w.r.t. the v command. Fix per the result of the IR. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 400 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 387) [DST-1892] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2854 Line: 24710 Section: more Problem: Shallification Action: R command is equivalent to -> R command shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 401 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 21) [DST-75] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_1 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2856 Line: 24777 Section: more Problem: line 1 or line 3 when doing v from more? (Historically, it was line 1, but the 1992 standard changed it to line 3 (rightly in my mind) so there is some "up" context on the screen. This change from 1992 (in .2b) penalizes vendors who followed the standard, and does not help the user in the long term. Action: IR submitted. Act on it when it's done. _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 402 wollman@lcs.mit.edu Bug in XCUd5 mv (rdvk# 498) {GAW-10} Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:07:57 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject__X__ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: We believe this ability is presently allowed under the general concept of Extended Security Controls in XBD 4.3 _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2861 Line: 24932-24948 Section: mv Problem: The language here is effectively defines ``rename across devices''. Analogous language in the `cp' command, under the `-p' option, allows the implementation to copy additional permissions not specified in this standard. Since rename() would preserve such permissions, it should be allowed here, and specifying it as implementation-defined would have the salutary effect of requiring implementations to document this behavior as they already do for `cp -p'. Action: Add before line 24940: Additional implementation-defined permissions may also be duplicated. (using my wording from a previous aardvark). An alternative, stronger wording: Additional implementation-defined permissions shall be duplicated, if such permissions are not changed by the rename() function. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 403 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 388) [DST-1893] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2865 Line: 25107 Section: newgrp Problem: Shallification Action: no password is requested. -> no password shall be requested. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 404 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 389) [DST-1894] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Replace 25233-25243 with -n increment A positive or negative decimal integer which shall have the same effect on the execution of the utility as if the utility had called the nice() function with the numeric value of the increment option-argument. (add nice() to the SEE ALSO) _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2869 Line: 25243 Section: nice Problem: "...requested increment would raise or lower the nice value of the executed utility beyond implementation-defined limits, then the limit whose value was exceeded shall be used." Since we have a definition of nice() we can refer to, and since I don't see any reason not to, it would be cleaner to say. Action: Replace 25233-25243 with -n A positive or negative decimal integer which will have the same effect on the execution of the utility as if the utility had called the nice() function (see....) with the same value. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 405 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 390) [DST-1895] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2873 Line: 25392 Section: nl Problem: Shallification Action: second character remains the -> second character shall remain the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 406 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 391) [DST-1896] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2885 Line: 25782 Section: od Problem: Shallification Action: This is equivalent to -> This shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 407 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 392) [DST-1897] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2885 Line: 25787 Section: od Problem: Shallification Action: This is equivalent to -> This shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 408 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 393) [DST-1898] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2885 Line: 25805 Section: od Problem: Shallification Action: This is equivalent to -> This shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 409 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 394) [DST-1899] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2886 Line: 25806 Section: od Problem: Shallification Action: This is equivalent to -> This shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 410 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 395) [DST-1900] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2886 Line: 25828 Section: od Problem: Shallification Action: This is equivalent to -> This shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 411 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 396) [DST-1901] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2910 Line: 26819 Section: pax Problem: Shallification Action: options, pax creates global extended -> options, pax shall create global extended [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 412 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 397) [DST-1902] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2912 Line: 26903 Section: pax Problem: Shallification Action: (This is equivalent to -> (This shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 413 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 398) [DST-1903] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2918 Line: 27162 Section: pax Problem: Shallification Action: page 2920), are included as -> page 2920), shall be included as [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 414 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 399) [DST-1904] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2918 Line: 27165 Section: pax Problem: Shallification Action: override the associated fields -> shall override the associated fields [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 415 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 400) [DST-1905] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: ISO/IEC 8859-? where ? = 3-10,13-16 incl , years to be taken off ISO site also add new ones to normative references _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2920 Line: 27230 Section: pax Problem: ISO-IR 8859 1 1987 ISO/IEC 8859-1: 1987 ISO-IR 8859 2 1987 ISO/IEC 8859-2: 1987 What about 8859-3 - 8859-?? Action: If the i18n folks agree, add the rest of the approved 8859-x standards. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 416 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 401) [DST-1906] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2925 Line: 27445 Section: pax Problem: No longer need to reserve it, since we have symbolic links. Action: or 2 (reserved for symbolic links), the size -> or 2 (a symbolic link), the size [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 417 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 402) [DST-1907] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: After 27493: Attempts to archive a socket using ustar interchange format shall produce a diagnostic message. Handling of other file types is implementation-defined _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2926 Line: 27491 Section: pax Problem: Pax does not discuss sockets, fattached files, and other stuff (shared memory objects) that can or might be in the filesystem. Action: I'm of mixed mind here: sockets and fattached files really don't make any sense on an archive (but then someone could prove me wrong). My current leaning is add at 27491: "Unless an implementation-defined extension is present, other file types shall not be recored in the archive, and shall be ignored on input." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 418 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 403) [DST-1908] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Add "symbolic links" after FIFOs on line 27563 Reorder entries as per markup draft _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2928 Line: 27567 Section: pax Problem: "Additional file types may be supported; however, such files should not be written to archives intended to be transported to other systems." Similarly to the change to 27491. Action: Replace with: "Unless an implementation-defined extension is present, other file types shall not be recored in the archive, and shall be ignored on input." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 419 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 404) [DST-1909] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2929 Line: 27612 Section: pax Problem: Shallification Action: name TRAILER!!! indicates the end -> name TRAILER!!! shall indicate the end [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 420 gwc@unisoft.com BUG in XCUd5 pax (rdvk# 26) {gwc pax gigabytes} Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:33:00 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: replace with 8589934592 bytes (8 * 2^30). _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2930 Line: 27656 Section: pax Problem: In ISO standards, the prefix "giga" means 10^9 so a "gigabyte" is 10^9 bytes. The file size limit for ustar and cpio formats is 8 * 2^30 bytes, not 8 * 10^9 bytes, so saying "8 gigabytes" is inaccurate. The ISO prefix for 2^30 is "gibi" (symbol "Gi") but perhaps this is not well enough known yet to use it here. Action: Change "8 gigabytes" to "8 gibibytes" or "8 GiB (8 W 10243 bytes)" or some other phrase that is equivalent to 8 * 2^30 bytes. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 421 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 405) [DST-1910] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: wbo _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2942 Line: 28161 Section: pr Problem: Would an application be conforming if it did mix -columns and -m? I don't think so, so make it a shall. Action: This option should not be -> This option shall not be [Ed recommendation: NONE the wording is the same as the base document and the editors believe it to be intentional and correct ] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 422 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 406) [DST-1911] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2943 Line: 28211 Section: pr Problem: Don't need "the". (When it was "the tab character" it was OK.) Action: shall be the ). -> shall be ). [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 423 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 407) [DST-1912] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2944 Line: 28229 Section: pr Problem: Shallification Action: file /dev/tty is used to -> file /dev/tty shall be used to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 424 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 408) [DST-1913] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: wbo _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2948 Line: 28411 Section: printf Problem: This appears to say that if any of the format specifier is reused, then all of it shall be reused. (It also addresses short lists in the first use.) 1) We have no precedent in this regard. C won't reuse format specifications if the list is too long. Using Fortran as a precedent isn't wholly unreasonable, but doesn't do what's described here (it quites after the last argument is consumed, and it has the "last parenthesis" rule). 2) Short lists aren't just a reuse problem. Action: Split in 2 parts. 9. The format operand shall be reused as often as necessary to satisfy the argument operands. If any of the format is reused, it shall be reused in its entierity, supplying missing arguments as below. 9a. If the format calls for more conversions than there are arguments, any extra c or s conversion specifiers shall be evaluated as if a null string argument were supplied; other extra conversion specifications shall be evaluated as if a zero argument were supplied. If the format operand contains no conversion specifications and argument operands are present, the results are unspecified. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 425 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 409) [DST-1914] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2952 Line: 28551 Section: prs Problem: Shallification Action: created delta is assumed. -> created delta shall be assumed. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 426 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 410) [DST-1915] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Do the action below and XCU ERN 426 972/16460 1950/44613 2508/11330 2684/18055 2952/28558 3125/35079 Add the final agreed-to note (from XCU ERN 426 below) after the paragraph (or in one case table) containing the page/line numbers above. (This list includes the line from ERN 426). Note to editor: the fact that touch uses a table, but all the other usages of this use essentially the same paragraph seems a bit odd. It would be nice if exactly the same wording was used in all such places. (As far as I can tell the meaning is the same in all places.) (It may be that the text paragraphs are identical; I didn't actually compare them word for word, but they do appear to be the same.) _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2952 Line: 28560 Section: prs Problem: For the YY component, values in the range [69-99] shall refer to years in the twentieth century (1969 to 1999 inclusive); values in the range [00-68] shall refer to years in the twenty-first century (2000 to 2068 inclusive). Should we at least note that this rule will have to be revised. Action: Note: it is expected that in a future revision of this standard the default century inferred from a 2 digit year will change. (This would apply to all commands accepting a 2 digit year as input.) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 427 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 411) [DST-1916] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2953 Line: 28606 Section: prs Problem: Shallification Action: by prs consists of: -> by prs shall consist of: [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 428 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 9) [ukuug-d5-j9] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: AAM - changes are needed to admin and delta to warn that the max lines recorded in the file is 99999; Change admin p2343, INPUT FILES line 4831-4833 add new para after first sentence. Add a new sentence to the end of the second para thus formed "If this file contains more than 99999 lines, the number of lines recorded in the header for this file shall be 99999 for this delta". Also on delta p2523, line 11836 add same sentence at end. In prs, take action given in aardvark. Add to CH for admin and delta New text is added to the INPUT FILES section warning that the max lines recorded in the file is 99999. This change is as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. Add to CH for prs The table in STDOUT is updated with a note adding that line statistics are capped at 9999 for the :Li:, :Ld:, :Lu: and :DL: keywords. This change is as per The Open Group Base Working Group resolution bwg2001-007. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2954 Line: 28621 Section: prs Problem: Description of keywords :Li:, :Ld:, :Lu: (and by implication :DL:) is incpomplete. These figures are capped at 99999. Action: Add after "nnnnn" in the Value column of the table (on each of lines 28623-28625), for each item, the footnote symbol "***". Add after the foot of the table (near line 28680 on page 2955), the following note:- *** The line statistics are capped at 99999. For example, if 100000 lines were unchanged in a certain revision, :Lu: shall produce the value 99999. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 429 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 412) [DST-1917] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2955 Line: 28698 Section: prs Problem: Not granting permission, just oberving. (This is an example.) Action: may write to -> might write to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 430 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 413) [DST-1918] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2956 Line: 28705 Section: prs Problem: Not granting permission, just oberving. (This is an example.) Action: may write to -> might write to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 431 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 414) [DST-1919] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2956 Line: 28709 Section: prs Problem: Not granting permission, just oberving. (This is an example.) Action: may write to -> might write to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 432 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 415) [DST-1920] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2957 Line: 28744 Section: ps Problem: Shallification Action: default, ps selects all processes -> default, ps shall select all processes [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 433 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 416) [DST-1921] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2958 Line: 28782 Section: ps Problem: Shallification Action: user ID is -> user ID shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 434 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 417) [DST-1922] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2958 Line: 28783 Section: ps Problem: Shallification Action: login name is written. -> login name shall be written. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 435 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 418) [DST-1923] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: bitwise-inclusive OR of all -> inclusive OR of all _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2958 Line: 28789 Section: ps Problem: These are not bitfields, so bitwise... doesn't make sense. (They're selection criteria.) Action: bitwise-inclusive OR of all -> union of all _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 436 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 419) [DST-1924] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2959 Line: 28823 Section: ps Problem: Shallification Action: output format is as follows. -> output format shall be as follows. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 437 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 420) [DST-1925] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 2959 Line: 28848 Section: ps Problem: Shallification Action: the parent, is -> the parent, shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 438 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 421) [DST-1926] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that shall be run in _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3006 Line: 30611 Section: qstat Problem: Use the right word. Action: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that may run in _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 439 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 422) [DST-1927] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that shall be run in _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3006 Line: 30621 Section: qstat Problem: Use the right word. Action: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that may run in _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 440 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 423) [DST-1928] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that shall be run in _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3006 Line: 30633 Section: qstat Problem: Use the right word. Action: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that may run in _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 441 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 424) [DST-1929] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that shall be run in _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3007 Line: 30641 Section: qstat Problem: Use the right word. Action: jobs that are allowed to run in -> jobs that may run in _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 442 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 425) [DST-1930] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3025 Line: 31307 Section: renice Problem: Shallification Action: the request applies to all -> the request shall apply to all [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 443 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 426) [DST-1931] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3029 Line: 31440 Section: rm Problem: Shallification Action: not specified, write a -> not specified, rm shall write a [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 444 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 427) [DST-1932] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3029 Line: 31459 Section: rm Problem: Shallification Action: write a prompt to the standard error and read a -> rm shall write a prompt to the standard error and read a [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 445 jay@gnu.org BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 10) [ukuug-d5-j10] 07 Jan 2001 00:59:01 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3038 Line: 31775 Section: sact Problem: The effect of 'get -e' can be reversed also with 'unget' and 'sccs unedit' as well as 'delta'. This is not pointed out by the specification of 'sact'. Action: Change line 31775 from a subsequent execution of delta to a subsequent execution of delta, unget, or sccs unedit. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 446 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 428) [DST-1933] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3041 Line: 31874 Section: sccs Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: default is the current directory. -> default shall be the current directory. The -d option takes precedence over -> The -d option shall take precedence over [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 447 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 429) [DST-1934] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3041 Line: 31876 Section: sccs Problem: Shallification Action: The default is the -> The default shall be the [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 448 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 430) [DST-1935] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3041 Line: 31878 Section: sccs Problem: Shallification Action: -d option-argument is -> -d option-argument shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 449 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 431) [DST-1936] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3041 Line: 31879 Section: sccs Problem: Shallification Action: -p option-argument is inserted before -> -p option-argument shall be inserted before [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 450 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 432) [DST-1937] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3043 Line: 31953 Section: sccs Problem: Shallification Action: same options are -> same options shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 451 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 433) [DST-1938] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3043 Line: 31963 Section: sccs Problem: ?? Action: Since fix doesn't leave audit -> Since fix does not leave audit [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 452 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 435) [DST-1940] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3047 Line: 32100 Section: sed Problem: Shallification Action: optional characters have no -> optional characters shall have no [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 453 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 434) [DST-1939] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: In default operation, sed cyclically shall append a line of input, less its terminating , into the pattern space. Normally the pattern space will be empty, unless a D command terminated the last cycle. The sed utility shall then apply in sequence all... _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3047 Line: 32102 Section: sed Problem: In default operation, sed cyclically shall copy a line of input, less its terminating , into a pattern space (unless there is something left after a D command), apply in sequence all This is unclear: "unless" what? I *think* it's trying to say the following. Action: In default operation, sed cyclically shall append a line of input, less its terminating , into a pattern space. Normally the pattern space will be empty, but if a D command has been used it may not be empty. It shall then apply in sequence all... _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 454 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 436) [DST-1941] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3048 Line: 32147 Section: sed Problem: Improper shall: does not state a requirement, just an observation. Action: 10) that shall be supported by -> 10) that is supported by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 455 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 437) [DST-1942] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3049 Line: 32173 Section: sed Problem: } Execute a list of sed functions only when the pattern space is selected. The list of sed functions shall be surrounded by braces and separated by s, as follows. "as follows..." if you mean the subsequent few sentences, this is confusing as a simple sentence. Minimally, make it "as follows:". Action: as follows -> and conform to the following rules: [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 456 gwc@unisoft.com BUG in XCUd5 sed (rdvk# 29) {gwc sed N command} Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:04:09 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3050 Line: 32217,32220 Section: sed Problem: An accepted change to draft 4 was applied to the wrong line. Action: Delete ", less its terminating ," from line 32220 and insert it in line 32217 after "next line of input". [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 457 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 439) [DST-1944] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3050 Line: 32242 Section: sed Problem: Use the right word. Action: shall lost its special -> shall lose its special [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 458 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 438) [DST-1943] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Out of scope To change this would require an interpretation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3051 Line: 32243 Section: sed Problem: "It is unspecified what special meaning is given to any character other than '&', '\', or digits." Thus, if I as a (foolish or perverse) implementor choose to give the value 's' the meaning "interpolate the OED here", I have a conforming implementation? Worse, a conforming application must protect each character from such expansion. Action: Just delete the sentence. If for some reason it can't be, at least limit the scope of the damage as much as possible. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 459 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 440) [DST-1945] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3055 Line: 32451 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: single hyphen is treated as -> single hyphen shall be treated as [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 460 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 441) [DST-1946] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3057 Line: 32508 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: the shell, determines the default -> the shell, shall determine the default [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 461 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 442) [DST-1947] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3057 Line: 32545 Section: sh Problem: "If IFS is not set, the shell shall behave as if the value of IFS were the s, s, and s. The plurality and "the" are wrong. Action: "If IFS is not set, the shell shall behave as if the value of IFS were , , . [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked] "If IFS is not set, the shell shall behave as if the value of IFS were , , and . _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 462 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 443) [DST-1948] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3058 Line: 32568 Section: sh Problem: "Informing the user shall be accomplished by writing a string of unspecified format to standard error prior to the writing of the next primary prompt string after the completion of an interval defined by the MAILCHECK variable." This appears to require that the shell wait for the mailcheck interval before writing the message and prompt, which isn't what's intended. Action: "Informing the user shall be accomplished by writing a string of unspecified format to standard error prior to the writing of the next primary prompt string. Such check shall be performed only after the completion of the interval defined by the MAILCHECK variable after the last such check." _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 463 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 444) [DST-1949] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3064 Line: 32836 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: are entered are -> are entered shall be [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 464 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 445) [DST-1950] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3065 Line: 32902 Section: sh Problem: It's "the" everywhere else. Action: command into a save buffer. -> command into the save buffer. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 465 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 446) [DST-1951] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3066 Line: 32947 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: character has special meaning -> character shall have special meaning [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 466 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 447) [DST-1952] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3066 Line: 32949 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: command history are treated as -> command history shall be treated as [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 467 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 448) [DST-1953] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3067 Line: 32960 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: ' character has special -> ' character shall have special [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 468 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 449) [DST-1954] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3067 Line: 32963 Section: sh Problem: Shallification Action: command history are treated as -> command history shall be treated as [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 469 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 22) [DST-76] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3070 Line: 33111 Section: sh Problem: The "history" of emacs is signficantly overcome by events. Action: 1) (In 33099-33118). All (I do mean all) references to need to be changed to "earlier revisions of this standard". Using the current draft is both incorrect and misleading. 2) Starting with 33114, replace with: development of earlier versions. At the time it was assumend that convergence on an acceptable definition would occur for a subsequent draft, but that has not happened, and there appears to be no impetus to do so. In any case, implementations are free to offer additional commal line editing modes based on the exact models of editors their users are most comfortable with. [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked perform the suggested changes, except that the first part of number 2) is modified to "development of earlier versions of this standard" or as suitable per editorial style.] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 470 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 450) [DST-1955] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3076 Line: 33298 Section: sort Problem: Shallification Action: option, but applies only to -> option, but shall apply only to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 471 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 451) [DST-1956] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3089 Line: 33781 Section: stty Problem: Shallification Action: detection. This has the effect -> detection. This shall have the effect [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 472 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 452) [DST-1957] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: on line 33892 This shall have the effect of setting CRDLY to CR0, CR1, CR2, or CR3, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field Plus (lots of markup removing extraneous "not setting") _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3092 Line: 33895 Section: stty Problem: This is a choice, not a boolean. Action: of setting (not setting) -> of setting _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 473 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 453) [DST-1958] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3092 Line: 33901 Section: stty Problem: This is a choice, not a boolean. Action: (not setting) TABDLY to TAB0, TAB1, TAB2, or TAB3, respectively, in the -> TABDLY to TAB0, TAB1, TAB2, or TAB3, respectively, in the _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 474 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 454) [DST-1959] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3092 Line: 33908 Section: stty Problem: This is a choice, not a boolean. Action: (not setting) BSDLY to BS0 or BS1, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field, as -> BSDLY to BS0 or BS1, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field, as _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 475 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 455) [DST-1960] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3092 Line: 33912 Section: stty Problem: This is a choice, not a boolean. Action: (not setting) FFDLY to FF0 or FF1, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field, as -> FFDLY to FF0 or FF1, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field, as _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 476 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 456) [DST-1961] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3092 Line: 33916 Section: stty Problem: This is a choice, not a boolean. Action: (not setting) VTDLY to VT0 or VT1, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field, -> VTDLY to VT0 or VT1, respectively, in the termios c_oflag field, _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 477 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 457) [DST-1962] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: wbo _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3094 Line: 33984 Section: stty Problem: There's no reason to repeat this table (4-20) a third time (and thus have 3!) ways for them to get out of sync. Action: Delete it and refer to table 10-1 instead. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 478 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 458) [DST-1963] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: split into two items and go uppercase _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3094 Line: 34000 Section: stty Problem: "Set the value of min or time to number." (min and time are bold). This seems to be referring to the fields in the termios structure, which are referred to in all-caps (as they are in the next sentence). Action: Convert to all caps, or boldface things such as VEOF in table 4-19. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 479 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 459) [DST-1964] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3095 Line: 34020 Section: stty Problem: Shallification Action: standard input is used to -> standard input shall be used to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 480 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 460) [DST-1965] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3102 Line: 34269 Section: tail Problem: Shallification Action: if any, is no smaller -> if any, shall be no smaller [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 481 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 461) [DST-1966] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3102 Line: 34288 Section: tail Problem: Shallification Action: This option is equivalent to -> This option shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 482 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 23) [DST-77] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3122 Line: 24997 Section: time Problem: Doesn't make sense using . Action: "" ("this volume...x") -> "earlier revisions". [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked The wording is as per 1003.2-1992, rewrite as follows- When the time utility was originally proposed to be included in the earlier revision of this standard, questions were raised about its suitability for inclusion on the grounds that it was not useful for portable applications, specifically:] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 483 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 462) [DST-1967] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3113 Line: 34644 Section: test Problem: ?? Action: executable. True if -> [Ed recommendation: Accept repetition, marked up on the draft] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 484 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 463) [DST-1968] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: wbo _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3118 Line: 34847 Section: test Problem: Use the right word. Action: Since implementations are allowed to add additional -> Since implementations may add additional _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 485 gwinn@res.ray.com command (rdvk# 495) {0102-4 } Mon, 12 Feb 2001 04:36:29 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Change "midnight on 1 January 1970" to read "00:00:00 on 1 January 1970". _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3126 Line: 35139 Section: Problem: The description of the epoch from which file timestamps are measured is ambiguous, in that people will be unclear as to when "midnight on 1 January 1970" happened, at the beginning or the end of that day. Action: Either repeat the words in "Epoch" (XBD page 61 section 3.149), or change "midnight on 1 January 1970" to read "the midnight between 31 December 1969 and 1 January 1970". _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 486 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 464) [DST-1969] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3132 Line: 35357 Section: tr Problem: Shallification Action: conventions below represents itself. -> conventions below shall represent itself. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 487 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 465) [DST-1970] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3132 Line: 35371 Section: tr Problem: Shallification Action: POSIX locale, represents the range -> POSIX locale, shall represent the range [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked POSIX locale, this construct shall represent the range ] _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 488 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 466) [DST-1971] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: wbo _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3134 Line: 35438 Section: tr Problem: Improper shall? This is borderline, in that it appears to be making an observation, but it might be making a requirement. I guess it doesn't hurt, but ... Yvette? Action: for squeezing) shall be required. -> for squeezing) are required. _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 489 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 467) [DST-1972] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3160 Line: 36371 Section: unexpand Problem: Shallification Action: standard output is equivalent to -> standard output shall be equivalent to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 490 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 515) [DWC-20] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3162 Line: 36443 Section: unget Problem: (shall usage) Editorial error. The word 'shall'/'would' should be used. Also at P3163 L36470 Action: Change "Any SCCS files processed are files" on L36443 to "Any SCCS files processed shall be files" Change "Any SCCS files updated are files" on L36470 to "Any SCCS files updated shall be files" [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 491 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 468) [DST-1973] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3171 Line: 36738 Section: uucp Problem: Shallification Action: in pathname are expanded on -> in pathname shall be expanded on [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 492 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 469) [DST-1974] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_X___ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: wbo _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3171 Line: 36747 Section: uucp Problem: Shallification Action: This destination is treated as -> This destination shall be treated as _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 493 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 470) [DST-1975] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3171 Line: 36752 Section: uucp Problem: Shallification Action: Anything else is prefixed by -> Anything else shall be prefixed by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 494 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 471) [DST-1976] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3171 Line: 36753 Section: uucp Problem: Shallification Action: the copy fails. -> the copy shall fail. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 495 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 472) [DST-1977] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3171 Line: 36754 Section: uucp Problem: Shallification Action: source-file name is used. -> source-file name shall be used. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 496 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 473) [DST-1978] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3184 Line: 37200 Section: uux Problem: Shallification Action: name expansion is not performed by -> name expansion shall not be performed by [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 497 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 474) [DST-1979] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Add to the end of 37207 (see the command-string operand description below) _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3184 Line: 37207 Section: uux Problem: Shallification Action: word ! cannot be used -> word ! shall not be used _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 498 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 475) [DST-1980] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3184 Line: 37208 Section: uux Problem: Shallification Action: Alias substitution is not performed. -> Alias substitution shall not be performed. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 499 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 516) [DWC-21] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3188 Line: 37354,37360 Section: val Problem: (shall usage) Editorial error. The word 'shall'/'would' should be used. Also at P3189 L37396 Action: Change "each line is independently processed" on L37354 to "each line shall be independently processed" Change "Any SCCS files processed are files of an" on L37360 to "Any SCCS files processed shall be files of an" Change "code returned by val is a disjunction" on L37396 to "code returned by val shall be a disjunction" [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 500 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 24) [DST-78] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3193 Line: 37535 Section: vi Problem: Two problems here: the string "' character" appears twice. I presume that one is intended as ' and the other as ` (forward and backward single quote) but in this layout (using this printer) they're indistinguishable. (They're barely distinguishable in the enlarged PDF). The table's very irregular horizontal spacing makes it hard to read. Action: 1) Reorder the table so the two "' character" entries are adjacent, which should make formatting the rest of the table easier. 2) Use a font that makes the two characters clearly distinct (CW, e.g.) or add text naming the two characters. (I prefer the latter.) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 501 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 (rdvk# 25) [DST-79] Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:47 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: by->indicated by _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3193 Line: 37556 Section: vi Problem: The word "by" here is potentially ambiguous, particularly in translation by non-expert (and in this case, I mean REALLY expert) translators. In this case, "by the cursor" is easily read as "by means of" rather than "nearby", and it ALMOST makes sense (and would to any non-expert). Action: "by" -> "adjacent to". (Or a lot of other word choices, probably.) _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 502 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com BUG in XCUd5 (rdvk# 517) [DWC-22] Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:58:51 -0800 (PST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: See Ed recommendation _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3252 Line: 40803,40811 Section: what Problem: (shall wording) Editorial error. The word 'shall'/'would' should be used. Action: Change "The following option is supported:" on L40803 to "The following option shall be supported:" Change "The input files are of any file type." on L40811 to "The input files shall be of any file type." [Ed recommendation: Accept as marked line numbers are 39803 and 39811 respectively] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 503 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 477) [DST-1982] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3254 Line: 39899 Section: who Problem: Shallification Action: field appears for dead -> field shall appear for dead [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 504 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 478) [DST-1983] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3254 Line: 39904 Section: who Problem: Shallification x 2 Action: field is LOGIN in such cases. -> field shall be LOGIN in such cases. Other fields are the same -> Other fields shall be the same [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 505 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 476) [DST-1981] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: (to the originator:Please refer to the minutes for the full discussion.) Add to RATIONALE It is acceptable for an implementation to produce no output for an invocation of who -l. _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3254 Line: 39905 Section: who Problem: -l (The letter ell.) List only those lines on which the system is waiting for someone to -login. This would appear to require that the potentially unlimited number of pty (for rlogin and telnet) and xterm ports be listed. I *think* that this is intended only for real serial lines with gettys on them, but there is no requirement that any such exist. (And in the case of many PCs, there is nothing on the serial lines.) Action: My first choice would be to delete this. If not, someone who wants it can rephrase it so it doesn't list all the ptys. (One could play word games with "waiting for", but it would be wrong. Some association with hardware is what's needed.) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 506 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 479) [DST-1984] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3254 Line: 39910 Section: who Problem: Shallification Action: other options are ignored. -> other options shall be ignored. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 507 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 480) [DST-1985] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3255 Line: 39917 Section: who Problem: Shallification Action: This option lists only those -> This option shall list only those [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 508 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 481) [DST-1986] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3255 Line: 39923 Section: who Problem: Shallification Action: the entry is marked . -> the entry shall be marked . [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 509 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 482) [DST-1987] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3261 Line: 40141 Section: xargs Problem: Extra "or". Action: s, or unescaped s or s. -> s, unescaped s or s. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 510 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 483) [DST-1988] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3261 Line: 40168 Section: xargs Problem: Shallification Action: Option -x is forced on. -> Option -x shall be forced on. [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 511 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 484) [DST-1989] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3263 Line: 40213 Section: xargs Problem: Shallification Action: file /dev/tty is used to -> file /dev/tty shall be used to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 512 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 485) [DST-1990] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3268 Line: 40456 Section: yacc Problem: Shallification Action: grammar, yacc writes a report -> grammar, yacc shall write a report [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 513 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 486) [DST-1991] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3270 Line: 40535 Section: yacc Problem: Shallification Action: lexical purposes is taken to -> lexical purposes shall be taken to [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 514 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 487) [DST-1992] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3271 Line: 40554 Section: yacc Problem: is not optional... see text and -1992 Action: %type [] name... -> %type name... [Ed recommendation: Accept] _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 515 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 488) [DST-1993] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3271 Line: 40558 Section: yacc Problem: Wasn't english in -1992, but let's make it that way now. (The intent is not to remove the definition, which is the most reasonable way to read "undefined".) Action: in grammar undefined by a -> in grammar not defined by a _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 516 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 489) [DST-1994] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: line 40839 change "one" to "single-byte" _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3277 Line: 40839 Section: yacc Problem: "If the parser and yylex( ) do not agree on these token numbers, reliable communication between them cannot occur. For (one character) literals, the token is simply the numeric value of the character..." There's an ugly i18n issue here, once you get to mulibyte characters. (Particularly if you ever get to the situation where a character is bigger than an int (unlikely, but conceptually possible with multibyte). Action: I really don't know. Reviewer's note, at least. (One possible out is to disallow wide and multibyte, but I don't really like that.) One possibility: At line 40535, add: If the grammar being defined uses single character tokens which cannot be represented in the current character set in the range of an unsigned char type the optional _number_ operand shall be used to give it a token number. (I wouldn't have a problem with limiting the range to 1-255 or even 1-128 if others think that that's better.) _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 517 donnte@microsoft.com Bug in xcud5 Assorted (rdvk# 490) [DST-1995] Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:57:08 -0800 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ Page: 3278 Line: 40864 Section: yacc Problem: Shallification The following functions appear only in the yacc -> The following functions shall appear only in the [Ed recommendation: Accept]