Austin Group Minutes of the 10 Dec Teleconference Austin-150 Page 1 of 1 Submitted by Andrew Josey, The Open Group. December 11, 2002 Attendees Andrew Josey, The Open Group Don Cragun , Sun, PASC OR Mark Brown, IBM, TOG OR The call commenced with a brief update on current status. Andrew stated that the IEEE Standards Board was considering TC1 this week, there had been some difficulties with the TC being in four parts, and that we'd probably have to submit TC2 as one document (with four chapters) should we do one. Andrew feels this is editorial and not an issue, but the Standards Board was concerned that not all the ballot group was looking at all the parts. We should know in a few days time whether TC1 got approved. Andrew has forwarded the appropriate resolution to Steve Nunn for forwarding to The Open Group Board of Directors but does not have a review date yet. Andrew reported that Cathy has integrated the majority of the changes into the document sources. We will complete the integration early in the New Year. We hope to get an updated html version ready once we get approval at the two of the three sponsoring organizations. The call picked up at the XCU,XRAT and XBD files within http://www.opengroup.org/austin/aardvark/finaltext/ Conclusions were as follows: _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 1 gwc@opengroup.org Defect in XCU locale (rdvk# 1) [gwc locale -k lists] Mon, 25 Nov 2002 15:26:17 +0000 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: We disagreed with the conclusion given in PASC interpretation 1003.2-1992 #146, and believe that the standard is clear . However since existing practise is divided we would recommend that the following be considered change the second sentence on 21167 from "If a value is non-numeric, it shall be written in the following format:" to "If a value is non-numeric and is not a compound keyword value, it shall be written in the following format: " Then add an additional para: "If a value is a non-numeric compound keyword value, it shall either be written in the format: "%s=\"%s\"\n", , where the is a single string of values separated by semi-colons, or it shall be written in the format "%s=%s\n", , where the keyword value is encoded as a set of strings, each enclosed in double-quotation marks, separated by semi-colons." (feeling was that this should go down the interps track, standard is clear but concerns fwd to the sponsor) _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 1 dwc@spartan.eng.sun.comDefect in XRAT A.12.2 Utility Syntax Guidelines(rdvk# 1) {Sun-dwc-USG_rationale} Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:34:41 -0700 (PDT) ____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: __________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 1 pere@hungry.com Defect in XBD setnetgrent()/innetgr() (rdvk# 10) {0} Sun, 1 Dec 2002 11:35:31 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Not appropriate for a defect report against the current spec. See the new work item guidelines in Austin/122 for how to progress this item. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 2 Erwin.Unruh@fujitsu-siemens.com Defect in XBD lround (rdvk# 8) {0} Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:37:51 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: No change required. The current text is aligned with Annex F as shown by the MX shaded text, and ISO C DR 240 allows this (see notes from Fred T) C99 Defect Report (DR) 240 covers this. The main body of C99 (7.12.9.7) says range error, while Annex F (F.9.6.7 and F.9.6.5) says "invalid" (domain error). The result was to change 7.12.9.7 to allow for either range or domain error. The preferred error is domain error (so as match Annex F). So, no need to change XBD. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 3 drepper@redhat.com Defect in XBD Conformance (rdvk# 5) {ud-process-34} Tue, 22 Oct 2002 03:25:34 +0100 (BST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 4 drepper@redhat.com Defect in XBD Definitions (rdvk# 4) {ud-vfork} Tue, 22 Oct 2002 03:36:43 +0100 (BST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Accept and also make the same change on line 1622 _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 5 David.Butenhof@hp.com Defect in XBD 3.297 (rdvk# 7) {drb.6.exit.def} Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:09:04 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Replace item 1 (lines 2437 and 2438) as follows: 1. Normal termination occurs by a return from main(), when requested with the exit(), _exit(), or _Exit() functions; or when the last thread in the process terminates by returning from its start function, by calling the pthread_exit() function, or through cancellation. 2) Add "_Exit(), " to 2441: 2441 Note: The _exit(), _Exit(), abort(), and exit() functions are defined in detail in the System Interfaces volume 2442 of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ COMMENT Enhancement Request Number 6 terekhov@de.ibm.com Defect in XBD 3.297 Process Termination (rdvk# 9) {alt-3.297-2002-11-12} Tue, 12 Nov 2002 13:37:44 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_of_5 Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 7 drepper@redhat.com Defect in XBD Definitions (rdvk# 3) {ud-spawn} Tue, 22 Oct 2002 03:53:12 +0100 (BST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Change the text to After a process is created by fork(), posix_spawn(), posix_spawnp() or vfork() , ... And update the list on 2428 accordingly _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 8 drepper@redhat.com Defect in XBD (rdvk# 2) {ud-process-35} Tue, 22 Oct 2002 05:16:33 +0100 (BST) _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: As below , but the words "or thread" should be TSP shaded. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTION Enhancement Request Number 9 ajosey@opengroup.org Defect in XBD sys/types.h (rdvk# 6) {pthread_t.} Wed, 6 Nov 2002 07:23:24 GMT _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_____ Accept as marked below_X___ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: Agree this is a defect, fwd concerns to the sponsor Add pthread_t after 12988 in (33303 p1051 says intent that thread_t could be a structure) _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ EDITORIAL Enhancement Request Number 10 gwc@opengroup.org Defect in XBD unistd.h (rdvk# 1) [gwc unistd symlink] Thu, 19 Sep 2002 12:33:04 +0100 _____________________________________________________________________________ Accept_X___ Accept as marked below_____ Duplicate_____ Reject_____ Rationale for rejected or partial changes: _____________________________________________________________________________ The next meeting is proposed to be Thursday January 16th at the regular timeslot Andrew will update the aardvark reports on the web site with the latest information.