HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: duke@portal.paperboy.osf.org (Robert Robillard)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Participating in POSIX working groups
Date: 7 Oct 1992 02:25:15 -0700
Organization: UUNET Communications
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: duke@portal.paperboy.osf.org (Robert Robillard)

In article <1arghmINNnbe@ftp.UU.NET> sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:
   In article <1aq5e3INN5rh@ftp.UU.NET>, ejsvehla@happy.colorado.edu writes:
   > I am looking for information pertaining to participating in POSIX working
   > groups.  Does anybody out there know how to do this?

Maybe we should add this to the FAQ?

   Yes, go to the next POSIX meeting. It is in Utrecht, Netherlands starting
   on the 26th of this month. I don't have the details, sorry.

Actually, it's the week before that October 19-23, at the Holiday Inn
(030-910368) and Scandic Crown (030-925200) Hotels in Utrecht.  Not
all the groups are going; however, the biggies are (1003.1, .2, .3,
.4, .5, .6, .7, .8, .10/.15, .11, .12, .14, .17, and 1201.2).

I can't find the address to write to if you want to get on the mailing 
lists for POSIX meeting minutes and drafts, but if you contact the
company that does the copying and mailing, I'm sure they'll take your
money:

        NAPS International
        9611 12th Ave South
        Bloomington, MN 55425
        USA
        612 888-0074
        612 888-0135

They may not know the word "POSIX."  You may have to use the phrase
"IEEE TCOS" (which stands for Technical Committee on Operating Systems.
TCOS is the parent organization of POSIX).

If you want to get on the list of people who get asked to vote on standards,
send mail to 

        IEEE Standards Office
        Attn: Anna Kaczmarek
        PO Box 1331
        Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331
        USA

and tell her you want to join the "TCOS Standards Subcommittee." Give 
your IEEE or IEEE Computer Society Number, if you've got one.  It says 
here that "Only IEEE or Computer Society members are eligibble balloters
on IEEE proposed Standards; non-members can participate as Parties of 
Interest."  This means non-member can vote and object, but their vote 
doesn't count in the final tally.

Joining the IEEE Computer Society is a lot cheaper than joining the
IEEE;  I think about $50 as opposed to about $100. Contact

        Computer Society of the IEEE
        1730 Massachusetts Ave NW
        Washington, DC 20036-1903
        USA

--
Bob Robillard                        Open Software Foundation
duke@osf.org                         Room 234
617-621-8931                         11 Cambridge Center
FAX 617-621-0584                     Cambridge, MA 02142

Volume-Number: Volume 29, Number 51
From: glennh@sgihbtn.sierra.com (Glenn Hoogerwerf)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: POSIX.1 Application Conformance Test Suites
Date: 10 Oct 1992 19:43:40 -0700
Organization: Sierra Geophysics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
Keywords: POSIX
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: glennh@sgihbtn.sierra.com (Glenn Hoogerwerf)

    My company, Sierra Geophysics, is a member of the POSC
(Petrochemical Open Software Corporation), which defines a system
level standard that includes, among other standards, the POSIX.1
interface.  To that end, we are currently searching for a test suite
that will allow us to judge the application compliance to the POSIX.1
system interface.  I am aware that X/Open is currently phasing out its
application conformance program due to the lack of test technology to
insure application conformance to the XPG standard, so this raises
the question as to X/Open's future plans in the application branding
arena.  Are there any test suites in existence that test for POSIX.1
conformance within an application?  I am aware of several tools available
from SunSoft, SPARC International, and AT&T, which test for appplication
compliance to SVID3, but these would require a significant amount of 
database modification to allow for POSIX.1 conformance testing.  POSC 
is in a similiar position to that of X/Open in that we do not wish to
mark an application as POSC compliant if it has not passed a suffient 
test suite.  I would greatly appeciate any information that you can
share with me regarding tools that you have evaluated or developed,
which might offer the functionality required for POSC to evaluate
application compliance to the POSIX.1 standard.

Thanks,

Glenn Hoogerwerf (glennh@sierra.com)
Sierra Geophysics
11255 Kirkland Way
Kirkland, WA  98033
(206) 822-5200 x526 


Volume-Number: Volume 29, Number 58
From: vanneste@crim.ca (Martial Van Neste)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Need an EWOS contact in Brussels
Date: 10 Oct 1992 19:44:14 -0700
Organization: CRIM
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
Summary: I need to know an EWOS contact in Brussels
Keywords: EWOS
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: vanneste@crim.ca (Martial Van Neste)

I will be in Europe for the POSIX meeting, before going to Utrech
i will be in Brussels, i know that the EWOS secretariat is in 
Brussels. I would appreciate if someone can mail me a conctact
i.e. e-mail adress (internet) or phone number of someone i can
reach.

I would like to see EWOS people to get more information about
their work on taxonomy and other work.

Thanks for prompt answer...

Martial Van Neste
CGI Group
5300 Blvd. des Galeries
Suite 300
Quebbec, Quebec   G2K 2A2
(418) 623-0101

e-mail :   vanneste@crim.ca

Volume-Number: Volume 29, Number 59
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Shared objects and dynamic loading
Date: 7 Oct 1992 17:49:29 -0700
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

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

>Submitted-by: brent@spss.com (Brent Lambert)
>Several platforms implement some form of shared objects & libraries,
>and/or dynamic linking & loading.
>
>Does, or will, Posix address these types of features?  Does, or will,
>any other standard?

Shared libraries, done right, are invisible to the user and hence do
not need standardizing.

Shared memory is one of the innumerable goodies that POSIX.4 is designing,
er excuse me I mean standardizing.  Opinions about POSIX.4 vary.

I'm not aware of anyone working on standards for dynamic linking/loading.
Frankly, my opinion would be that we're nowhere near understanding it
well enough to standardize it.  (Although that hasn't stopped some
people in other areas...)
-- 
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 29, Number 57
From: karish@pangea.stanford.edu (Chuck Karish)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: experience w/ POSIX on vms and ultrix.
Date: 7 Oct 1992 13:06:09 -0700
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

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

In article <1aq5h3INN5ub@ftp.UU.NET> eggert@twinsun.com (Paul Eggert) writes:
>RCS, a widely used free version control system, was made Posix-compliant
>about a year ago.  In the past, VMS users ported old RCS releases to
>native VMS.  You'd think that VMS Posix would save these users a lot of
>work, since it should be much easier to port new RCS releases to VMS Posix
>than to native VMS.  But so far as I know, nobody has yet ported RCS to
>VMS Posix.  I'm not a VMS expert, so I don't know the details, but the
>general sentiment seems to be that if you really want to use RCS under
>VMS, you have to port it to native VMS; VMS Posix doesn't do the job.

I've been told that the VMS POSIX.1 implementation simply
creates a large VMS file in which a POSIX.1-compliant file
system can be built, and thus creates a limited sandbox in
which POSIX.1 programs can run.  I can understand why an
implementation of RCS running in such an environment would
be less than ideal; it wouldn't be able to manage files in
the VMS file system.

>There's a big difference between conforming to a standard and supporting a
>standard.  In the past, skeptics have suggested that the widely advertised
>Posix interfaces for non-Unix operating systems from DEC and HP (and
>promised interfaces from IBM and Microsoft) are merely smokescreens to
>fool government bean counters who require Posix.

If this is to change, it'll have to be because government
users buy into the POSIX philosophy and demand systems that
support POSIX functionality as a fully capable operating
system interface.  I don't know whether the right place to
express this demand is in the FIPS that mandates POSIX or
in the specifications of the individual procurement.  I
lean toward the latter, because it's difficult to require
that systems "do the right thing" and still (a) be fair to
all vendors and (b) give the government agencies enough
leeway to procure the products they need.

The public comment period on the proposed FIPS 151-2
ended a week ago, so if you disagree with my opinion
you've just missed an excellent opportunity to influence
US government policy on the issue.
--

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


Volume-Number: Volume 29, Number 56
From: martinea@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Alain Martineau)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: XTI
Date: 10 Oct 1992 19:45:21 -0700
Organization: Hydro Quebec
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: martinea@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Alain Martineau)

In article <1auan8INNk8@ftp.UU.NET>, alex@elvis.sitka.sun.com (Alexander G. Smith) writes:
> I'm looking for information on the XTI standard..

It is documented in a widely available book from OSF:

OSF/1 Network Applications Programmer's Guide
Prentice Hall

Alain Martineau
martineau@macmartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca


Volume-Number: Volume 29, Number 60
Newsgroups: comp.std.misc
From: mikeg@rocdec.roc.wayne.edu (Michael George)
Subject: Mumps and Unix Processes
Organization: Wayne State University, Detroit
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:57:27 GMT

Anyone know how to change the PRIORITY of a UNIX PROCESS that was
started from within MUMPS or MSQL? Having a problem with PROCESSES
running deathly slow. Somehow I need to give these processes more higher
priority.
 
mikeg@woodie.roc.wayne.edu
From: awright@gssec.bt.co.uk (Alan Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.std.misc
Subject: Re: X/Open article needed
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:25:31 GMT
Organization: BT, Software Engineering Centre, Glasgow, UK

In article <BvGAyx.HHM@csn.org>, vic@teal.csn.org (Victor E. Schoenberg) writes:
|> I'm looking for the "X/Open Preliminary Specification (April 1990)
|> Distributed Transaction Processing: the XA Interface". Can someone
|> suggest how to obtain this? 
|> 
|> Thanks.
|> -- 
|> Vic Schoenberg
|> vic@csn.org

The specification is no longer preliminary, it is official.
The only addition I have to Kees Verruyt's message is a
contact email address:

               XoSpecs@xopen.co.uk

The question is when are they going to stop arguing about
the TX interface and publish it? :->

	Alan.

--------------------------------------------
awright@gssec.bt.co.uk (Alan Wright)
BT, Software Engineering Centre, Glasgow, UK
--------------------------------------------
From: awright@gssec.bt.co.uk (Alan Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.std.misc
Subject: Re: Mumps and Unix Processes
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:39:22 GMT
Organization: BT, Software Engineering Centre, Glasgow, UK

In article <1992Oct8.185727.10691@cs.wayne.edu>, mikeg@rocdec.roc.wayne.edu (Michael George) writes:
|> Anyone know how to change the PRIORITY of a UNIX PROCESS that was
|> started from within MUMPS or MSQL? Having a problem with PROCESSES
|> running deathly slow. Somehow I need to give these processes more higher
|> priority.
|>  
|> mikeg@woodie.roc.wayne.edu
|>  

You want to prioritise Unix processes ? >:-> In most versions of
Unix that I know of you don't get a lot of control over normal
processes. If the machine is running slow there is a good chance
it will be something to do with the memory in the machine. If
there is not enough memory the OS will spend a lot time swapping
pages of memory in and out, and this can have a fairly disasterous
effect on performance. Speak to your system administrator about it.

If the processes are accessing data on remote disks then this could
also be a problem due to network traffic.

I don't think the nice command would help, but you could try it.

Alan.

--------------------------------------------
awright@gssec.bt.co.uk (Alan Wright)
BT, Software Engineering Centre, Glasgow, UK
--------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
From: Erik Naggum <enag@ifi.uio.no>
Date: 07 Oct 1992 17:32:17 +0100
Subject: Re: ANSI and NIST

Matt Caprile <mfc@medoc.aux.apple.com> writes:
|
|   ANSI does develop standards. It is the U.S. national representative to
|   I.S.O. (International Standards Organization). As such it participates
|   in developing I.S.O. standards.

Just a very minor correction.  "ISO" is not an abbreviation, and it
doesn't stand for "International Standards Organization".  It's sort of
an acronym, but it also comes from Greek, where it's a prefix which
means "same".  The full name of ISO is "the International Organization
for Standardization".  "ISO" is never used with interspersed periods.

Best regards,
</Erik>
--
Erik Naggum             :  ISO  8879 SGML     :      +47 295 0313
                        :  ISO 10744 HyTime   :
<erik@naggum.no>        :  ISO 10646 UCS      :      Memento, terrigena.
<enag@ifi.uio.no>       :  ISO  9899 C        :      Memento, vita brevis.
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
Subject: Re: ANSI and NIST
Keywords: ANSI, NIST
Date: 7 Oct 92 13:15:59 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <3865@ra.nrl.navy.mil> atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson) writes:
>  NIST develops OFFICIAL US GOVERNMENT STANDARDS.  Sometimes it does
>this in conjunction with ANSI work and sometimes not.  However, NIST
>standards are very much official and are not just "advisory" or
>"recommendations."  The acronym FIPS stands for Federal Information
>Processing STANDARD, for example.

Or to put it another way, ISO/ANSI says "All ISO 123 widgets are 10mm long"
and FIPS says "All widgets used by the U.S. government must conform to 
ISO 123". In particular, NIST produces the US GOSIP, which is basically a 
list of ISO standards.
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
From: MICHAEL.WILLETT@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("Michael Willett")
Subject: Re: Need info on localization/internationalization
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: 08 Oct 92 10:51:56 EST

Regarding the request for information on localization, translation,
and internationalization, I would suggest that interested people
contact one of the leading industry "gurus" on this technology,
Miguel Brazao.  A former Wang Laboratories director of international
products, he has also been associated with Bull internationalization
strategy.  He has developed some exciting new concepts, especially
regarding the use of artificial intelligence and natural language
normalization, making substantial improvements in the efficiency and
effectiveness of language localization work.  He can be contacted at
the Burlington, Mass. (US) firm Peritus.  It is best to send him a FAX
since he is normally out at customer sites.  His FAX there at
Peritus is (617) 221-7122.  Since he is perfectly fluent in French,
Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, you can send him a FAX in any of
these languages.  His Cantonese has become a little weak now because
of lack of practice! -- :-)


Michael.Willett@OFFICE.Wang.com
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
From: stephe@mks.com (Stephen Walli)
Subject: Re: ANSI and NIST
Keywords: ANSI, NIST
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:01:00 GMT

In <1992Oct7.015834.16314@times.aux.apple.com> mfc@medoc.aux.apple.com (Matt Caprile) writes:

Mathew is essentially correct with the exception of two small nits. 
[Hey. I'm a standards person. I'm supposed to be retentive :-) ]

>ANSI does develop standards. 
ANSI develops *no* standards. 
It accredits other organizations to develop standards. 
The ANSI C standard was developed by a 
CBEMA organization, X3, hence the standard's designation X3.159. 

> (2) NIST sometimes will not wait for a standard. [NIST made specs
>     using draft versions of POSIX.1 and POSIX.2.]
Exactly correct, except there was never a real FIPS for POSIX.2 in draft form.
[FIPS == Federal Information Processing Standard]
There were a couple of attempts, but they failed due to the real instability
of POSIX.2 in those days. I point this out only because NIST is just now 
putting together the real draft FIPS of POSIX.2 as POSIX.2 became a full use 
IEEE standard in September. (IEEE Std. 1003.2-1992.) The NIST announcement
has just gone out this week to begin the process. 

>To resume, (and to grossly simplify) ANSI is the standards organization
>for the US. NIST writes specifications to be used/met for government
>contract bidding.
Absolutely. 

cheers,
stephe
-- 
---------------- So there is a God. What's your point? ----------------------
Stephen R. Walli      Mortice Kern Systems Inc.      phone: +1 (519) 884-2251 
stephe@mks.com        35 King Street N., Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2J 2W9
From: atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson)
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
Subject: Re: ANSI and NIST
Keywords: ANSI, NIST
Date: 7 Oct 92 11:20:49 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, DC

Not quite right --

  NIST develops OFFICIAL US GOVERNMENT STANDARDS.  Sometimes it does
this in conjunction with ANSI work and sometimes not.  However, NIST
standards are very much official and are not just "advisory" or
"recommendations."  The acronym FIPS stands for Federal Information
Processing STANDARD, for example.

  The relationship between the IEEE and ANSI wasn't described very
clearly either.  The IEEE develops standards that are used world-wide
on its own, independent of ANSI.  Occasionally some of those IEEE
standards will be propagated to ISO via ANSI (e.g. the POSIX work of
IEEE 1003.*/ISO9945-* and most of the LAN standards in IEEE 802.*/ISO
8802-*).  However many IEEE standards are never offered to ANSI at
all.  Also, IEEE standards are world-wide rather than just being for
the US, though the power transmission specs do tend to be North
American conventions of 120 VAC, 60 Hz rather than the European
conventions of 220 VAC, 50 Hz.

Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
From: mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Markus Kuhn)
Subject: Power transmission (was: ANSI and NIST)
Reply-To: mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen, Germany
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 11:08:44 GMT

atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Randall Atkinson) writes:

>Not quite right --
[...]
>      Also, IEEE standards are world-wide rather than just being for
>the US, though the power transmission specs do tend to be North
>American conventions of 120 VAC, 60 Hz rather than the European
>conventions of 220 VAC, 50 Hz.

Not quite right -- :-)

The new power standard for Europe (I forgot the precise name of the document)
is now 230 VAC. Previously, there have been several voltages around 220-235 V.

Germany is changing at the moment from 220 V to 230 V and we have been told that
this won't have any consequences for our hardware ...

Markus

-- 
Markus Kuhn, Computer Science student -=-=- University of Erlangen, Germany
Internet: mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de  |  X.500 entry available
-A distributed system is one in which the failure of a computer you didn't-
-even know existed can render your own computer unusable. (Leslie Lamport)-
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
From: arthur@solomon.technet.sg (Arthur Sombrito)
Subject: Re: friend declaration scope
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 07:20:51 GMT


--


Hi,

I'd like to add something to my original post.

One ambiguity is regarding the visibility and scope of a friend.
ARM p. 248 states that the name of a friend is not in the scope of 
the class.  I would assume that this refers to friend functions only.
Otherwise a nested class can't be made a friend. 

ARM p. 250 states that an undeclared class or function name is
entered in the same scope as the name of the class containing
the friend declaration. It would then mean that if a nested class 
exists with the same name as the friend class, then the friend class 
refers to the nested class. Otherwise if no class exists by that 
friend name, then it is a forward declaration of a class which is 
in the same scope as the class containing the friend declaration.

Given:

  short f() {}
  class C { protected: enum A {}; class F {};};
  class D {};
  class F {};
  class B : public C
  {  
    long f() {}
    friend short f(); // ok? Does it refer to ::f()?

    friend class F;   // ok - refers to C::F 
    friend class A;   // ok - forward declare a ::A class

    class D {};
    friend class D;   // Does it refer to B::D?

    enum C {};
    friend class C;   // Is ::C visible?
                      // If my interpretation is correct, ::C is still
                      // visible since no class exists within class B
                      // definition
  };

Many thanks.
From: qbarnes@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Quentin Barnes)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: implicit pointer of pointer argument promotion legal C++?
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:26:53 GMT
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Urbana Design Center

In ANSI-C, the following code is not legal:
	void f(const char **s);

	void g()
	{
		char **s = 0;
		f(s);
	}

ANSI-C does not allow for implicit conversion of pointer of pointer
arguments.  (See 3.3.2.2 for discussion of promotion of function
arguments.  This case is one that does not hold true for 3.3.16.1).

Cfront 3.0.1 eats the non-ANSI-C code without blinking.

I can't find in the 23-sep-91 ANSI-C++ draft if pointer of pointer
promotion is allowed or disallowed.  Can anyone point me to the
appropriate reference(s) so I know whether cfront is broken or not?

BTW, what's the latest ANSI-C++ draft?
-- 
Quentin Barnes
qbarnes@urbana.mcd.mot.com | ..!uiucuxc!udc!qbarnes
From: Lewis.G..Pringle@f1.n100.z60.wlink.nl (Lewis G. Pringle)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: ios::iword, ios::pword, ios::xalloc
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 20:14:26 -0100

Organization: Sophist Solutions

In article <1992Oct8.234902.12170@lucid.com> jss@lucid.com (Jerry Schwarz) writes:
>These functions are intended to support extension of stream types
>without requiring derivation.  My claim is that this is useful because
>the actual type of a stream is lost in an expression involving insertions
>or extractions.  That is
>
>	mystream m ;
>	m << y << mymanipulator ;
>
>You can't declare
>
>	mystream& mymanipulator(mystream&) ;
>
>because it's argument is an ostream&, not a mystream&.  However mymanipulator
>can look into the infinite arrays  for any useful information put there
>by the mystream constructor.

Could you please elaborate even further.

A long standing problem with the isotream library, from my point of view,
was that roughly half the time I wanted the interpretation of inserters
to be that it inserted a "pretty" form of the item, and the other half
of the time I wanted the interpretation to be to insert an EXTRACTABLE
represenation of the item. This "pretty" form is most often useful when
preparing to display some object, or when writting out debug info. The
EXTRACTABLE version is most useful when saving and restoring to a file.

I've experimented with hacks like global variables, etc, but what I really
wanted was the ability to "add a boolean" into the iostream so that each
inserter could write things out appropriately. Ideally I would want the
predefiend inserters and extractors (eg int) to also pay attention to
this boolean.

Could the iword/pword mechanism be used to achieve this? Do you know of
some better mechanism to achieve this? How are you supposed to actually
use the iword/pword mechanism? Where is it documented?

			Lewis.
-- 
Reading peoples signatures is a real waste of time.

lewis@sophists.com                                  (Lewis Gordon Pringle, Jr.)

Newsgroups: comp.std.c++