From owner-cvs-all Sat Oct 27 12:46:39 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C361E37B401; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 12:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from wollman@localhost) by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.4/8.11.4) id f9RJkXe88069; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:46:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wollman) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:46:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman Message-Id: <200110271946.f9RJkXe88069@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: "Andrew R. Reiter" Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/ufs/ufs ufs_acl.c In-Reply-To: References: <200110270539.f9R5dHY50655@freefall.freebsd.org> Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG < said: > just say "We're POSIX.1e compliant... sorta kinda maybe" ? We can't even say that, since POSIX.1e officially unexists. I have hope that the people working on this will eventually get together with Nick Stoughton (USENIX standards liaison) and PASC (the POSIX people) to charter a new .1e effort (which by IEEE rules will have to be called something else). The problem with .1e was that its scope was too large, and the group was unable to come to concensus on some of the interfaces which were included in that scope. A new effort, if chartered, would presumably restrict its scope to just those interfaces on which concensus has already been achieved. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message