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

Last update: 20 April,2001

								1003.2-92  #13

	Class: The unaddressed issue

The standard does not address this issue, and as such no conformance
distinction can be made between alternative implementations based on this.
This is being referred to the Sponsors of the standard for clarifying 
wording in the next amendment.

This response will be incorporated in an IEEE interpretations
publication, and will be also made available on-line on the IEEE 
SPAsystem.

 _____________________________________________________________________________



	Interpretation Number:	(to be assigned by the IEEE)
	Topic:			patch
	Relevant Sections:	5.22.7.1


Interpretation Request: (Defect Report)
-----------------------
 
 
          In Section 5.22.7.1 - Patchfile Format, the standard  states 
          that ``patch shall recognize the following expressions: 
 
               *** filename timestamp   The  patches  arose  from 
               filename. 
               --- filename  timestamp   The  patches  should  be 
               applied to filename. 
 
          [Draft 12 of IEEE Std 1003.2-1992 (July 1992), p. 620, lines 
          3572-3575] 
 
          In Section 5.22.7.2 - Filename Determination,  the  standard 
          then describes what occurs when patch finds these lines  (in 
          point #1): 
 
               then [patch shall] test for the existence of  both 
               files  in  the  current  directory  (or  directory 
               specified with the  -d  option).   If  both  files 
               exist, the patch  utility  shall  assume  that  no 
               pathname can be obtained from this step. 
 
          [Ibid., p. 620, lines 3584-3587] 
 
          If only one of these files exists,  which  one  is  used  to 
          obtain the pathname?  One would expect  the  existing  file, 
          however the standard does not explicitly state it. 
 

IEEE Interpretation for 1003.2-1992 
-----------------------------------
The standard does not address this issue, and a conforming implementation
may take any behavior in this area. Concern over the specification in
this area has been forwarded to the Sponsors of the standard.

Rationale for Interpretation:
-----------------------------
None.


 _____________________________________________________________________________