X/Open (The Open Group) Institutional Ballot +44 118 950 8311 x2250 ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org Fax: +44 118 950 0110 P1003.1j/D7 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 0 c 1 1 Sect 0 Comment page 0 line 0 Problem: (no annex c - header contents) This draft does not contain an annex c. Since this has historically been an error prone part of POSIX it would be best to enumerate this rather than leave it to the editorial staff. Action: Enumerate the header file contents as per annex c of posix.1-1996. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 2.5 c 2 2 Sect 2.5 EDITORIAL COMMENT. page 8 line 92-97 Problem: Since these types are all dependent on the threads option as explained in section 2.9.3 , we need to add a forward reference here so that is clearer. Action: Add "(see clause 2.9.3)" to the ends of lines 93, 95, 97. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 5.6.1.1 o 3 3 Sect 5.6.1.1 OBJECTION. page 15, line 10 Problem: This text is an unconditional addition to which will make existing implementations non-conforming. This addition needs to be made optional dependent on the appropriate option. Without this existing implementations of POSIX.1 will be deemed non-conformant once this amendment is approved. Action: Add before line 10 If the .... option is supported the following macro will test if a file is of the following type: S_TYPEISTMO .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 11.2.6 c 3 3 Sect 11.2.6 COMMENT. page 21, Line 3-5 Problem: This editors note states that if 1003.1d is not approved then this text will be omitted from this draft and placed into that draft. Since that draft (1003.1d) is also out for ballot we assume that it will have to reballoted before it can be accepted into it. Action: None in this document, but please raise this with the IEEE, as it appears to be a procedural irregularity. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 12.4.2.4 o 4 4 Sect 12.4.2.4 OBJECTION. page 57, Line 222-223 Problem: This includes an ENOSYS error return which implies a stub. An amendment should not require implementations to provide stubs. This requirement should be removed. Without this change existing implementations of POSIX.1 will be deemed non-conformant once this amendment is approved. Action: Delete lines 222-223 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 12.4.3.4 o 5 5 Sect 12.4.3.4 OBJECTION. page 58, Line 269-270 Problem: This includes an ENOSYS error return which implies a stub. An amendment should not require implementations to provide stubs. This requirement should be removed. Without this change existing implementations of POSIX.1 will be deemed non-conformant once this amendment is approved. Action: Delete lines 269-270 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 12.4.4.4 o 6 6 Sect 12.4.4.4 OBJECTION. page 60, Line 311-312 Problem: This includes an ENOSYS error return which implies a stub. An amendment should not require implementations to provide stubs. This requirement should be removed. Without this change existing implementations of POSIX.1 will be deemed non-conformant once this amendment is approved. Action: Delete lines 311-312 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ 14.2.6.4 o 7 7 Sect 14.2.6.4 OBJECTION. page 73, Line 146-147 Problem: This includes an ENOSYS error return which implies a stub. An amendment should not require implementations to provide stubs. This requirement should be removed. Without this change existing implementations of POSIX.1 will be deemed non-conformant once this amendment is approved. Action: Delete lines 146-147 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ I.1 o 8 8 Sect I OBJECTION. page 87-91, line 1-152 Problem: Inclusion of interface specifications such as Annex I, that do not have concensus to be brought forward as normative text sets a very bad precedent. This appears to be standardization by publication. If there is no concencus to include this section within the normative text then it should not appear here. It should be removed and brought forward as a separate specification if it has value. Action: Remove this informative annex. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @ J.1.3 o 9 9 Sect J OBJECTION. page 93-100, line 1-232 Problem: Having an informative annex that places no requirements on implementations, and then defining section J.1.3.1 implies that this is standardization by publication. If there is no concencus to include this section within the standard then it should not appear here. It should be removed and brought forward as a separate specification if it has value. Action: Remove this informative text. END of ballot