> I am sponsoring the following fast track for myself. It seeks Minor
Again, anything that wouldn't qualify for a Patch release binding?
> release binding and is set to timeout on 31 January. The appendix
> contains all of the command synopses for the various coreutils
> commands.
>
> (Typo warning: this case has an appendix to follow; 2007/407 does
^^^
typo ;-)
> not.)
> Location Uncommitted
> Invocation Uncommitted
> Human-readable output Volatile
^^^^^^^^
I thought we had "Not an Interface" that would be a better choice
to discourage scripting of human readable output. Is there some
reason to not choose "Not an Interface"?
> md5sum
> sha1sum
> sha224sum
> sha256sum
> sha384sum
> sha512sum
I'd like to express my concerns here in addition to the other's
already mentioned. While I completely understand not forking
from the FOSS versions except to build in the Solaris environment,
I'm concerned that not using the Solaris optimized algorithms
will be a dissatisfier. I'm also concerned about what appears to
be a future Solaris evaluation requirement. See PSARC/2007/016
Medimum Robustness PP for audit of cryptographic function failure.
I've recently been working off line with some of the Crypto project
team to investigate these requirements more fully and provide
for adding audit to the various crypto utilities.
Perhaps /usr/gnu/* would be excluded from any evaluation. Again
I think that could be a dissatifier. In general all of what ships
as core Solaris meets evaluation criteria.
Gary..
