🚀 go-pugleaf

Submitted-by: norcott_bill@tandem.com (Bill Norcott)

In article <15p74fINNhmp@ftp.UU.NET>, YYBRIAN@ARIEL.LERC.NASA.GOV writes:
>I need an update on POSIX.
[...]
>is there any info on what vendors are doing
>about POSIX?

Tandem Computers has publicly announced our intent to develop POSIX
for our proprietary GUARDIAN operating system.  The program is well
under way but I am not allowed to discuss release dates.

Hewlett-Packard also has an on going program to develop POSIX for
their proprietary operating system.

-- 
Bill Norcott			GUARDIAN POSIX project
Tandem Computers, Inc.		
10600 N. Tantau Avenue		PHONE:  (408) 285-3253
Cupertino, CA   95014		EMAIL: norcott_bill@tandem.com

Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 81

Submitted-by: david@mks.com (David Rowley)

In article <15pugbINNqoi@ftp.UU.NET> norcott_bill@tandem.com (Bill Norcott) writes:
>In article <15p74fINNhmp@ftp.UU.NET>, YYBRIAN@ARIEL.LERC.NASA.GOV writes:
>>I need an update on POSIX.
>[...]
>>is there any info on what vendors are doing
>>about POSIX?
>

Unisys has also taken their CTOS operating system to POSIX (including
POSIX.1 and POSIX.2).  CTOS has the distinction of being the first
non-UNIX operating system to be certified as POSIX.1 (FIPS 151) conforming.

The HP operating system that is going POSIX is MPE-XL, now called MPE/iX.

IBM has made a strategic announcement saying that their MVS and OS/400
operating systems are going POSIX.

And of course, many UNIX vendors are moving towards POSIX compliance.

David.

-- 
David Rowley
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.
35 King Street North, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2J 2W9
519/884-2251, FAX 519/884-8861, david@mks.com


Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 84

Submitted-by: karish@pangea.stanford.edu (Chuck Karish)

In article <15p74fINNhmp@ftp.UU.NET> YYBRIAN@ARIEL.LERC.NASA.GOV writes:
>
>I need an update on POSIX. I need to have a brief, understandable
>description of each document and a timeframe for each (i.e. 1003.1
>standard 1990, 1003.2 become standard in September, 1992, etc.).


At the risk of belaboring the obvious, have you been
following this group (comp.std.unix) and reading the snitch
reports from members of the verious groups?  They are
available by anonymous FTP from many archive sites, or in
hard copy from usenix as published in their newsletter
(;login:).  These reports include best guesses of timeframe
from participants in the groups.  They often include brief
summaries of the groups' objectives.

Send e-mail to office@usenix.org for information on
obtaining back copies of ;login:.  And send a
note and, if you can, a contribution to usenix
to thank them for sponsoring the snitch coordinator
and publishing the reports.
--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@forel.stanford.edu


Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 85

Submitted-by: scotte@cdsac.uucp (L. Scott Emmons)

In article <15p74fINNhmp@ftp.UU.NET> YYBRIAN@ARIEL.LERC.NASA.GOV writes:
>for the first time. Also, is there any info on what vendors are doing
>about POSIX?  Now and in the future such as Digital Equipment having
>1003.1, 1003.2, 1003.4 in their VMS V5.5-1 operating software. How
>about other major vendors? I appreciate any and all help. Thanks in
>advance.

The IBM RS/6000's running AIX are completely POSIX compliant. Note
that any modern UNIX machine will be *close* to POSIX compliant, since
the POSIX standard is clearly derived from UNIX.

Recommended texts, in addition to the actual POSIX drafts:

"The POSIX.1 Standard, A Programmer's Guide", Fred Zlotnick, 1991, 
	Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., 379 pgs.

"IBM POSIX Conformance Guide", IBM, 1990, IBM, 34 pgs.

"UNIX System V Release 4, Programmer's Guide: POSIX Conformance", USL,
	1988, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 44 pgs.

-- 
			   L. Scott Emmons
		     csusac.csus.edu!cdsac!scotte


Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 87

Submitted-by: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)

>>>is there any info on what vendors are doing
>>>about POSIX?
>And of course, many UNIX vendors are moving towards POSIX compliance.

Note, in particular, that 4.4BSD is trying to be as POSIX-compliant as
possible, subject to manpower limitations etc.
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 88

Submitted-by: mckee@claude.se.hou.compaq.com (George McKee)

Not to mention the reports that Microsoft NT will be POSIX compliant when
it appears.

There are other OS's, such as SCO Unix, that claim to be "mostly compliant".
As far as I can tell, that means that they've left out the document that
lists which of the optional parts of POSIX they've included.  (Where's the
document that lists the nonconformances in the conformance document?)
	SCO Unix is X/Open branded, but X/Open isn't the ISO.  Do their
customers care?  Do you?  What's going on to harmonize the work of the
two organizations?

	- George McKee

--
Internet: mckee@imail.Compaq.com                uucp: uunet!cpqhou!gmckee
Voice: +1 713 378 7991                          Fax: +1 713 378 0627
USPS: Compaq Computer Corp., P.O. Box 692000 M010301, Houston TX, 77269-2000
Disclaimer: if I'm wrong, it's not Compaq's fault....


Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 89

Submitted-by: peterw@spaten.sharebase.com (Peter Wisnovsky)

In article <166v0lINNpj8@ftp.UU.NET> mckee@imail.compaq.com (George McKee) writes:
>Submitted-by: mckee@claude.se.hou.compaq.com (George McKee)
>
>Not to mention the reports that Microsoft NT will be POSIX compliant when
>it appears.

Not really in terms of character set support. My understanding is that
they are going to fix wchar_t at 16 bits to store Unicode data, which
strictly speaking is non-conformant. This raises the general issue
of how Unix standards organizations are going to react to Unicode. It seems
pretty clear that many major companies are moving in the direction of 
Unicode. However, the absence of AT&T from the last Unicode implementors
workshop bodes ill for inclusion of Unicode in SVR5 anytime soon.

Unfortunately there seems to be no satisfactory way to imbed Unicode
within the EUC framework used in AT&T's MNLS system, which I understand
is their implementation of Posix international language support.

I'd love to hear differently, since I envision having to support Unicode
some day, but am loath to do it without substantial support from the OS.

Peter Wisnovsky
-- 

UUNET:   peterw@sharebase.com
US Mail: ShareBase Corporation - 1919 Addison Ave. - Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone:   (510) 548-3211


Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 90

Submitted-by: mcs@icl.co.nz (Malcolm Stayner)

>>I need an update on POSIX.
>[...]
>>is there any info on what vendors are doing
>>about POSIX?

ICL has had an XPG/3 base branded version of VME since July 1991, in 
addition to having all its current UNIX platforms certified as being 
X/Open XPG/3 compliant!


-- 
Malcolm Stayner           Email: mcs@icl.co.nz     "Intelligence is silence,
Open Systems Consultant   Tel: +64-4-472 4884       truth is being invisible,
Fujitsu ICL N.Z. Ltd      Fax: +64-4-472 6737       but what a racket I make in
P.O. Box 394, Wellington, New Zealand               declaring this" NED ROREM


Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 91