Usenet 1994 January/usenetsourcesnewsgroupsinfomagicjanuary1994.iso/sources/std_unix/volume.30/text0093.txt

Text File | 1993-03-11 | 8.5 KB | 195 lines

Submitted-by: [e-mail] (Jeffrey S. Haemer)

           USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee

       Stephen R. Walli <[e-mail]>, Report    Editor


       POSIX.7:    System Administration


       Bob Robillard <[e-mail]> reports on the January
       11-15, 1993 meeting in New Orleans, LA:

       Introduction

       Three of    the POSIX.7.1 System Administration small groups
       met during the week:

    POSIX.7.1 - Printing Administration,

    POSIX.7.2 - Software Installation and Management, and

    POSIX.7.3 - User and Group Administration.
       There were also several plenary meetings    of the group, and
       issues were discussed that cut across sub-groups.

       POSIX.7_-_Overall

       The first issue discussed by POSIX.7 as a whole was the
       question    of Test    Assertions (TA)    and Language Independence
       (LIS).  I suspect this issue is discussed at length in
       another snitch report, so I'll just give    POSIX.7's angle.
       The group had discussed this in the past, and was clearly in
       agreement with Stephen Walli's movement to drop these
       requirements.  We wrote a letter    to the SEC stating our
       position    and POSIX.6 (Security Extensions), POSIX.11 (TP
       Profile), and POSIX.14 (Multi-processor Profile)    co-signed
       it.

       Since the Test Assertion    requirement was    suspended by the
       SEC and the Language Independence requirement is    under
       attack, the group has decided to    limit the amount of time
       spent on    these to a bare    minimum.  If an    LIS is still
       required    by the time the    Print Group goes to ballot in May,
       a rough draft of    one will be submitted with the real, C
       language    draft.

       The second cross-group issue debated was    the question of
       using common command line options for ``extended    options    ''
       (i.e., options that take    more than a simple switch to
       specify).  Both the Printing and    Software Management command
       line interfaces (CLI) describe similar files that can con-
       tain extended options for commands.  It was decided to use
       the same    option letter for these    ``extended options files''
       (-X).

       Both CLIs also allow these extended options to be passed    in
       a quoted    string on the command line, and    there was an agree-
       ment to use the same letter for this as well (-x).  Unfor-
       tunately, the groups couldn't agree upon    a common syntax    for
       the content of the files    and strings.

       The last    POSIX.7-wide issue was the question of dis-
       tinguished names.  These    are names of entities in the net-
       work, e.g., machines or print daemons.  It was decided that
       the POSIX.7.X drafts would require that implementations
       accept Internet style names and can allow any other style
       they want.

       The suggestion of requiring X.500 style names (/co=usa-
       /org=dec/host=foobar/printer_server1) was voted down, mainly
       because it's not    widely used.  In fact, even the    POSIX X.500
       API doesn't use it directly!  That API requires applications
       to parse    the name given on the line and fill a C    structure,
       so it is    just as    happy with Internet names as with the "/"
       style names.

       POSIX.7.1_-_Print_Administration

       The first issue the Printing group dealt    with was the forth-
       coming new edition of the ISO Document Printing Application
       (DPA) Draft.  The POSIX printing    document is based on the
       ISO DPA.     A new version of the ISO DPA is due out in May    or
       June, and the printing group had    to decide how to deal with
       the new document.

       One of the members of POSIX.7.1 is also a member    of the ISO
       DPA committee.  He went over the    changes    in the next ver-
       sion, and the group decided that    their effects on the POSIX
       document    were small enough that they could be incorporated
       into the    draft during the ballot    process.

       The group next discussed    a number of changes proposed by    the
       Open Software Foundation.  None of these    were serious
       changes,    and most were adopted.    In addition, the section
       describing the Name Service was extensively re-written and
       the programming examples    in the rationale for the API were
       brought up to date.

       The printing group started the process of forming a ballot
       group.  Although    the dates for ballot are not final, the
       POSIX.7.1 ballot    will probably run from May 10 to July 16.
       To get on the ballot group, contact:

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

       Tell her    you want to join the ``TCOS Standards Subcommit-
       tee.''  [Ed. - TCOS, the    Technical Committee on Operating
       Systems,    is no longer the parent    of the POSIX standards sub-
       committee.  TCOS-SS has become PASC, the    Portable Applica-
       tions Standards Committee.]  Give your IEEE or IEEE Computer
       Society Number, if you've got one.  Only    IEEE or    Computer
       Society members are eligible balloters on IEEE proposed
       Standards; non-members can participate as Parties of
       Interest, which means they can vote and object, but their
       vote doesn't count in the final tally.

       Alternatively, you can contact Bob Robillard (908-699-2249,
       [e-mail])

       POSIX.7.2_-_Software_Management

       The Software Group had a    set of written comments    from a
       number of the members, and they spent the week going through
       them, improving the draft for their mock    ballot.     The mock
       ballot will be conducted    from March 1 to    March 31.  To join
       in this ballot, contact Jay Ashford, [e-mail],
       512-838-3402.

       Many of the comments reviewed dealt with    cleaning up the
       command line interface (e.g. determining    options    names, and
       so on).    There was a long debate    on the value of    allowing
       multiple    ``MIBs'' or databases of installed software pack-
       ages.  In the end, the group decided to permit this.

       Other details were worked out, such as the use of a Name
       Server, the media format    (the POSIX pax format was chosen),
       and use of environment variables.  The idea of making every-
       thing in    the standard optional except for the distribution
       format was discussed.  This would ensure    portability of dis-
       tributions, but wouldn't    do anything toward promoting a com-
       mon command set.     The decision was reached to make the
       entire draft required, at least for the present.

       POSIX.7.3_-_User_and_Group_Management

       The User/Group sub-group    made some concrete progress toward
       a real draft.  After reviewing POSIX.1 and POSIX.2 for any
       user/group items    and meeting with POSIX.6 to learn their
       concerns, they wrote a scope and    picked three base documents
       to merge    into a draft:

      - USL's System V Interface Definition    3rd Edition (with
        additions from the new Distributed Manager user manage-
        ment product)

      - OSF's DCE user management

      - SCO's user management product
       The Scope and Base document list    was given to POSIX.7's PMC
       Mentor, who agreed that they would make a good start.  [Ed.
       - The POSIX Project Management Subcommittee (PMC) assigns
       some one    to act as a mentor or guide to each project, who is
       supposed    to be a    shield for some    of the procedural work,    and
       help the    project    keep on    track.]

       POSIX.7.3 will be creating a Project Authorization Request
       (i.e., permission to start a document) in April.     The PMC
       Mentor is happy with their proposal, and    intends    to recom-
       mend granting approval.    In anticipation    of that, they will
       attempt to have Draft 1 of POSIX.7.3 in the mailing before
       the April meeting.

       While it    is somewhat premature to work out the details of
       the command line, POSIX.7.3 contributed to the joint debate
       on the ``extended options'' (i.e., -x and -X) and intends to
       follow the lead of the other two    groups.

       In addition, they presented the idea of another common
       option:    a ``template'' object, used as a template from
       which to    create real objects.  For example, a typical-user
       template    would have all the information necessary to set    up
       a new typical user, and could be    specified in the useradd
       command (this is    similar    to inheritance in the OO world).
       There was agreement from    POSIX.7.1 and POSIX.7.2    that this
       could be    useful,    and will be investigated further.


Volume-Number: Volume 30, Number 95