Thanks for clearing that up, I'm less confused now....
Can you also explain how XSI fits into the big picture?
The definition page has:
"
XSI
The X/Open System Interface is the core application programming
interface for C and sh programming for systems conforming to the Single
UNIX Specification. This is a superset of the mandatory requirements for
conformance to IEEE Std 1003.1-2001.
"
Does that mean that XSI is not required to be POSIX conformant?
Is is accurate to say "XSI is a POSIX extension and not part of the core
POSIX standard"? Or what?
Graham Greene
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Stoughton [mailto:yyyy@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 5:47 PM
> To: Graham Greene
> Cc: yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Confused...
>
>
> The Single UNIX Specification version 3 is the same as POSIX.1:2001.
>
> This standard has been jointly developed by the IEEE and The
> Open Group. It is both an IEEE Standard and an Open Group
> Technical Standard.
>
> Abstract: This standard defines a standard operating system
> interface and environment, including a command interpreter
> (or "shell"), and common utility programs to support
> applications portability at the source code level. This
> standard is the single common revision to IEEE Std
> 1003.1-1996, IEEE Std 1003.2-1992, and the Base
> Specifications of The Open Group Single UNIX Specification,
> Version 2. This standard is intended to be used by both
> applications developers and system implementors. It comprises
> four major components (each in an associated
> volume):
>
> 1. General terms, concepts, and interfaces common to all
> volumes of this standard , including utility conventions and
> C-language header definitions, are included in the Base
> Definitions volume (XBD).
> 2. Definitions for system service functions and
> subroutines, language-specific system services for the C
> programming language, function issues, including portability,
> error handling, and error recovery, are included in the
> System Interfaces volume (XSH).
> 3. Definitions for a standard source code-level interface
> to command interpretation services (a "shell" and common
> utility programs for application programs are included in the
> Shell and Utilities volume (XCU).
> 4. Extended rationale that did not fit well into the rest
> of the document structure, containing historical information
> concerning the contents of this standard and why features
> were included or discarded by the standard developers, is
> included in the Rationale (Informative) volume (XRAT).
>
>
> On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 12:36, Graham Greene wrote:
> > Can "The Single UNIX Specification, Version 3" be used as a
> reference
> > for functions that are defined by POSIX? The reason I ask
> is because
> > this site: http://standards.ieee.org/catalog/olis/posix.html
> > shows 4 volumes for 1003.1-2001, where volume 1 is "System Interface
> > (POSIX)" and for volume 2 is says "This standard is
> equivalent to the
> > Single UNIX Specification". Whats the difference? (I don't
> have a grand
> > to download them and find out.)
> >
> > Also, if I wanted to write a POSIX compliant application,
> would it be
> > more likely to run a more systems today if stuck to POSIX.1 or
> > POSIX.2? (Again, the only thing I have access to "The Single UNIX
> > Specification, Version 3" on www.unix.org.
> >
> > Graham Greene
>
>
>
|