Don Cragun wrote: > > Casper Dik wrote: > >> > ... ... ... > >> Recent publications of the Open Group Technical Standards, > >> including > >> [IEEE P1003.1 Draft 5.1, 15 May 2008] has confirmed that this > >> interface > >> shall be named 'faccessat' and shall have the following prototype: > >> > >> int faccessat(int fd, const char *path, int amode, int > >> flag); > > [snip] > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------- > >> | Interface | Commitment Level | > >> ------------------------------------------------------- > >> | faccessat() | Committed | > >> ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Is it possible to make this interface "Uncommited" until the IEEE > > P1003.1 Draft has been made an official standard (e.g. what would you do > > if somehow the Draft changes the prototype or functionality in a subtle > > way - add another symbol or add some more hacks which depend on the > > |libc::__xpg6| variable) ? > > > > It is no longer a draft standard. It was formally approved by all three > bodies (The Open Group as SUSv4, by IEEE as IEEE Std 1003.1-2008, > and by ISO as ISO/IEC IS 9945:2008) last year. The specification for > this function did not change during balloting.
Ok... can we then remove the word "draft" from the text above, please (which was the reason for my concerns - it looked like we're going to get a "Commited" interface based on a standard _draft_ (which already has backfired several times in the history of Solaris)) ? > The branding program for the next UNIX brand is not yet in place. Ok... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;)
