Defect Report concerning: IEEE Std. 1003.1d-1999
Clause: 3.1.4.4
PASC Interpretation Ref: pasc-1003.1-104
Topic: EBADF

This is an unapproved interpretation of PASC 1003.1d-1999.

Use of the information contained in this unapproved document is at your own risk.

Last update: 10 April,2001 

								1003.1d-99  #104

 _____________________________________________________________________________

	Interpretation Number:	XXXX
	Topic:			EBADF
	Relevant Sections:	3.1.4.4




PASC Interpretation Request: (Defect Report)
----------------------------  

	Date: 2000 May 18

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

 7  Defect Report concerning (number and title of International Standard
    or DIS final text, if applicable): 

Advanced Realtime Extensions: IEEE Std 1003.1d-1999

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

 8  Qualifier (e.g. error, omission, clarification required):

2

Error=1 , Omission=2, Clarification=3

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

 9  References in document (e.g. page, clause, figure, and/or table
    numbers):

3.1.4.4

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

10  Nature of defect (complete, concise explanation of the perceived
    problem):


1003.1d, Section 3.1.4.4 (d14,p16,l117) EBADF currently
states that this applies to "fildes". It is most probably
true for "newfildes".


------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

11  Solution proposed by the submitter (optional):

Add "or newfildes" after "fildes"


------------------------------------------------------------------------ 



Interpretation response
------------------------
The standard does not speak to this issue, and as such no conformance
distinction can be made between alternative implementations based on
this. This is being referred to the sponsor.

Rationale
-------------
None.

Notes to project editor (not part of this interpretation):
----------------------------------------------------------
For posix_spawn_file_actions_adddup2(), the EBADF case should
be extended to include "newfildes" as noted in section 11 above.

Forwarded to Interpretations group: 21 May 2000
Proposed resolution: 28 May 2000
Finalised Interpretation: 25 July 2000