From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 10db24,fec75f150a0d78f5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: emery@grebyn.com (David Emery) Subject: Re: POSIX/Unix conformance (was: ANSI C and POSIX ...) Date: 1996/04/08 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 146465260 references: <4kb1l1$ajm@solutions.solon.com> <4kcf2q$mll@solutions.solon.com> organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.edu Date: 1996-04-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: There are actually two separate issues that no one has adequately addressed: 1. POSIX conformance 2. Unix(tm) conformance Let me try to summarize POSIX conformance. First, there are a series of POSIX standards, IEEE 1003.1 and 1003.2 are the primary standards of interest here. These are also ISO standards ISO 9945-1 and 9945-2 (respectively). And, they are U.S. FIPS standards (FIPS 151-2). POSIX conformance is defined by two documents, the relevant standard and the set of test assertions. The test assertions specify a series of tests that a conforming implementation pass. The assertions themselves are NOT executable. Instead, a POSIX tester translates these assertions into a test suite. U.S. NIST has developed a set of validation procedures based on commercial testing. A POSIX validation tester submits his test suite to NIST, and NIST 'validates' this suite against the test assertions. The test suite itself remains the property of the testing organization. The goal of the NIST 'validation' is to certify the testing organization as acceptable to issue NIST FIPS conformance certificates for the implementation. NIST maintains a list of conforming POSIX/FIPS 151-2 implementations. This differs from Ada testing in a critical way: For Ada validation, the test suite iteself is freely available. It is (relatively) easy to verify that an Ada validation (ACVC) test matches the standard, and there is a single test suite for all validations. For POSIX testing, each tester has his own test suite, and we have to trust NIST and the testing vendor that the vendor's test actually tests POSIX compliance. As regards to conformance with the Unix(tm) trademark, this is based on a set of procedures established by (the late) X/Open. I'm not familiar with X/Open's requirements to use the "Unix" trademark. Note that it's quite possible to validate non-Unix operating systems as POSIX-compliant. In fact one of the earliest validations was for Unisys CTOS, which is NOT a flavor of Unix. I believe that there is a version of Windows NT which is POSIX-compliant, and I recall hearing something about a POSIX version of Windows 95. And then there's "Open VMS" (an oxymoron, IMHO), which is a POSIX-compliant version of VMS. In these cases, what we have is a POSIX interface on top of a Non-Unix operating system. dave