Article View: comp.std.unix
Article #904Re: access permissions in 1003.1
From: Michael I Bushnell
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1991 21:47
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1991 21:47
21 lines
1563 bytes
1563 bytes
Submitted-by: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
In article <1991Jun3.225808.8518@uunet.uu.net> OFM writes:
[ Personal comment here: the one vendor I personally know who had
qualms about full POSIX compliance did so because of backwards-
compatibility problems. I suspect many vendors will have the
same reservations. So, how about it: is full compliance worth
breaking old programs/scripts? --mod ]
I'm most interested in Posix.1, so I'll address that. If a compiler
switch is provided (like gcc -ansi) then full compliance is possible.
Given the _POSIX_SOURCE feature test macro, OS designers can load all
they want in, and turn it off only when _POSIX_SOURCE is defined. I'm
writing a Posix compliant system which will also be 4.4BSD compatable;
I know whereof I speak.
-mib
Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 86
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1991Jun4.221021.26605@uunet.uu.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!uunet.UU.NET!sefReferences:
<1991Jun3.192534.28089@uunet.uu.net> <1991Jun3.225808.8518@uunet.uu.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!uunet.UU.NET!sef From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) Subject: Re: access permissions in 1003.1 Message-ID: <1991Jun4.221021.26605@uunet.uu.net> Originator: sef@uunet.UU.NET Sender: usenet@uunet.uu.net (UseNet News) Nntp-Posting-Host: uunet.uu.net X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA References: <1991Jun3.192534.28089@uunet.uu.net> <1991Jun3.225808.8518@uunet.uu.net> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 21:47:09 GMT Approved: sef@uunet.uu.net (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan - comp.std.unix)