From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Nov 7 14:37:52 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA21547 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:37:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA21529 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:37:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ingenieria ([168.176.15.11]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with SMTP id MAA18095 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 12:13:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from unalslip.usc.unal.edu.co by ingenieria (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA19006; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:08:28 +0600 Message-ID: <32826B99.7A43@ingenieria.ingsala.unal.edu.co> Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 15:07:05 -0800 From: "Pedro Giffuni S." Reply-To: pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co Organization: Universidad Nacional de Colombia X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jake Hamby CC: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Welcome to POSIX... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jake Hamby wrote: > 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? > It was, more or less discussed that TET is an aditional test that can be use to test other conformances as well. It is more strict. The latest version isnīt free but the old versions are being ported. If you can publish or provide your result with FreeBSD current, they would be useful. Anyway we may decide not to certify ($$$!) but keep fbsd complaint. An eventual goverment contractor may find it economically advantageous to certify, but money can be better spent in other things. Pedro. > 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 :-) > > -- Jake