RE: AI 2001-03-05

[Bruce Korb <yyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> (Please followup with this discussion to the off-topic reflector,
> to subscribe see http://www.opengroup.org/austin/lists.html )
> 
> I think we are already there with the claims of "supporting/
> complying" to POSIX --- POSIX compliance is claimed by many
> vendors today -- usually with very little understanding in
> what they are claiming. It thus has little value anymore.
> 
> We need customers to ask to see the POSIX conformance
> documentation and demand to see the products on a registered 
> products list.  We need better profiles and documents
> explaining what to procure and what to ask for when procuring.
> regards
> Andrew

As long as conformance is confirmed with eyeballs instead of
rigorous conformance suites, there will be genuine misunderstanding
over whether or not a system conforms.  ``autoconf/configure'' is a
good model for producing a ``posixconf'' script, methinks.