From: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
To: Seth McDonald <sethmcmail@pm.me>
Cc: "linux-man@vger.kernel.org" <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Early POSIX versions seldom included in history sections
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2025 18:44:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aUbf39o2ce0WhJoA@devuan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Wd9QASP6rczMWW9o5HQVSOFmDMpmWqmUDTl5T1WrPshq-HU7DB41CGYaLMx7bHyEK5GOjtZ1EIV7GJgbXZlQyjS2DxLIuxWdMFYqPsoNJEI=@pm.me>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2039 bytes --]
On Sat, Dec 20, 2025 at 04:17:44PM +0000, Seth McDonald wrote:
> Hello again!
Hi Seth!
> I've noticed that in almost all man pages for POSIX functions, the
> history section documents only as far back as POSIX.1-2001, even when
> the function appeared in prior POSIX versions. For example, the man
> pages for close(2), read(2), and malloc(3) all list POSIX.1-2001 as the
> functions' first appearance in POSIX, when all three were included in
> POSIX.1-1988 (though read(2) got its current function signature in
> POSIX.1-1990).
>
> But there are a few man pages that do actually go further back. By
> grep-ing the repo with
>
> $ grep -E -nr -e 'POSIX.1-19[0-9]{2}' man
>
> I get 28 matches, some of which are from functions' history sections,
> such as in the abs(3) and ctime(3) man pages. Which makes me think that
> either the history sections were intended to start at POSIX.1-2001 and
> these few exceptions were unintended/overlooked. Or the exact version of
> POSIX that most functions were introduced in was not known, while
> POSIX.1-2001 was freely available online as html to check.
It's the latter. In the cases where we know old details, we've
documented them. Otherwise, we've checked the standards that are easily
available (i.e., POSIX.1-2001 and later), and if we learn some API was
older, we can always go back and document it.
> If the reason is the latter, then I'd be happy to help here. I have
> access to POSIX.1-1988, POSIX.1-1990, and POSIX.1-1996, as well as SUS
> (1994) and SUSv2 (1997). So I can check each function and update their
> man page's history section with an earlier POSIX (or SUS) version if
> applicable. Though only if that's desirable for the man pages, of
> course; let me know if so.
Yup! Thanks a lot! That would be helpful. :)
Have a lovely night!
Alex
>
> ----
> Seth McDonald.
> sethmcmail at pm dot me (mailing lists)
> 2336 E8D2 FEB1 5300 692C 62A9 5839 6AD8 9243 D369
--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-20 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-20 16:17 Early POSIX versions seldom included in history sections Seth McDonald
2025-12-20 17:44 ` Alejandro Colomar [this message]
2025-12-21 8:17 ` Seth McDonald
2025-12-21 12:49 ` Alejandro Colomar
2025-12-22 0:58 ` Collin Funk
2025-12-23 3:56 ` Seth McDonald
2025-12-23 12:43 ` Alejandro Colomar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aUbf39o2ce0WhJoA@devuan \
--to=alx@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sethmcmail@pm.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox