Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:27:20 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: jehamby@lightside.com (Jake Hamby) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Welcome to POSIX... Message-ID: <199611072027.NAA10568@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.AUX.3.94.961107104602.19524A-100000@covina.lightside.com> from "Jake Hamby" at Nov 7, 96 10:54:27 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I now have a copy of the NIST POSIX conformance test suite, or > NIST-PCTS:151-2. Right now I'm running it on a Solaris box so I can be > familiar with it before I try FreeBSD. > > I should note, though, two things: First, this is a test for FIPS 151-2, > and not strictly POSIX.1 (it's POSIX.1 with a few additional tidbits). > Second, this test suite does _NOT_ require TET to be installed, as Terry > had mentioned. Perhaps I have a different test suite from what Terry > was thinking of? If so, is that other test free as well? I already answered this. I made a mistake; the TET is required for my FABIO test suite which I have been working on. I plopped the thing into the same framework and call it from a TET environment. It was my setup, not the test itself, which required TET. I made the mistake because I was running both PCTS and SVID against UnixWare back at Novell. SVID requires TET (so does the X11 validation suite). > I received the test suite from Martha Gray at NIST, and as Terry > mentioned, it does not yet have the proper legal notices for a more > wide-spread distribution. However, as I've already discovered at least > one Linux distribution which claims to be POSIX.1 and FIPS 151-2 > conformant already (Linux-FT from Lasermoon), I'm going to hurry and post > up my finding ASAP (it's only a matter of time before RedHat, e.g., get > tested for POSIX, and we don't want to be left in the dust :-) The Linux distributor bought the suite. They ran the suite and hacked the OS iteratively to make it conform. Then they paid over $50,000 to an accredited testing lab to run the suite for them, and sign off on a conformance certificate. You personally running the test is meaningless. You can claim compliance (in a sort of carefully worded way), but not conformance. To be able to claim conformance requires certification, which requires $$$. The only thing this changes is that now you can do precertification testing without purchasing the suite. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611072027.NAA10568>