Use of the information contained in this unapproved document is at your own risk
.Last update: 04 September,1996
2003.1-92 #4
Classification: Editorial defect
This will be forwarded to the IEEE for incorporation into a future
errata sheet for the document, as well as 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: link() and PCD_LINK_FILE_SYSTEM
Relevant Sections: p117n65/6
Interpretation Request:
-----------------------
POSIX 2003.1 states:
Page 177, lines 1393-1403.
65(C) If {PCD_LINK_FILE_SYSTEM} is FALSE:
When the link named by new and the file named by
existing are on different file systems, then a
call to link(existing, new) returns a value of
(int)-1, sets errno to [EXDEV], creates no link,
and the link count of the file referenced by
existing remains unchanged.
66(C) If {PCD_LINK_FILE_SYSTEM} is not documented:
When the link named by new and the file named by
existing are on different file systems, then a
call to link(existing, new) is either successful
or returns a value of [(int)-1], sets errno to
[EXDEV], creates no link, and the link count of
the file referenced by existing remains
unchanged.
Problem:
These assertions require a second file system to test the
assertion. The availability of a second file system is a
"testing constraint".
Action:
Replace in each assertion above "(C)" with "(PCTS_FS?C:UNTESTED)".
Also, add to the "Testing Constraints", Table 1.1, page 9, line 292
the entry:
"PCTS_FS Implementation provides another file system."
IEEE Interpretation for 2003.1-1992
-----------------------------------
The problem and actions statements are accepted as written.
The standard does not completely specify the testing constraints for these
assertions. This is an editorial omission. This will be documented in
an errata for the document and also referred to the
sponsor for clarifying wording in the next amendment, with the suggested
action being the action stated in the original text above.
Rationale for Interpretation:
-----------------------------
None.
_____________________________________________________________________________