Re: Early POSIX versions seldom included in history sections

[Collin Funk <collin.funk1@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 848 bytes --]

Hi Seth and Alex,

Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org> writes:

>> Suppose instead a function was first introduced in SUSv2, included in
>> POSIX.1-2001 as an XSI extension, then in POSIX.1-2008 it was moved to
>> Base. Should its history section include POSIX.1-2001 or POSIX.1-2008 as
>> its first POSIX appearance (since XSI is SUS)?
>
> I think you could do this:
>
> SUSv2.
> POSIX.1-2001 (XSI).
> POSIX.1-2008.

Just want to mention that I find all of these document names confusing.
Maybe because some of them predate me, or predate me using a computer, I
do not know.

Therefore, I thought I should mention the names are described in
standards(7) along with the full documents they correspond to. I would
stick to the names listed there for consistency. That is what I have
done when making changes to the glibc and gnulib manuals.

Collin


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]