Austin Group

Austin GroupStatus UpdateSeptember 2007http://www.opengroup.org/austin/UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open GroupPOSIX is a registered trademark o f The IEEE1

SummaryThe Austin Group JDOCS Procedures Participation Draft Development Methodology Maintenance Procedures Plenary Meeting Goals Plenary Meeting Deliverables 2

The Austin Group 3The Austin Common Standards RevisionGroupAn open industry initiative to revise the corePOSIX standard and the Single UNIXSpecification; standards that lie at the heart oftodays open systemsChair and editors from The Open Group

The Austin GroupElectronic participation Participation in the group is free Deliverables: 4IEEE Std 1003.1 (POSIX.1) (incl former 1003.2)The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 6ISO/IEC 9945(they are the same document!)

About the Austin Group 522 Participants (mailing list members as ofSeptember 2007 (was 532 in September 2006)Wide industry support, Apple, BM, Sun, HP, Fujitsu have certified UNIX 03systems Green Hills and Wind River have certified within thePOSIX certification program Organizations supporting the activity include: HP, IBM,Red Hat, Sun, USENIX, Participation in the Austin Group from the OpenSource community includes The Linux Standard Base, NetBSD, FreeBSD, GNU andmany others.5

Participation# of Members of the Austin Group Mailing List475451600 580 580 558 54453253352209 9804 9907 9940136035130137501 0005 0009 00251245201175151126101511761703 0105 0101 0201 0301 0401 0502 0609 0602 07609 07

Page CountDraft Page count37623590 3582 3698 3700 37143501373437903718320030012501 250027002001150110015011D1 D2 D3D4 D5D6Note: Ft 2001 edition, D1R. 200x revision7ft ft tc1 ft tc2D1R D2R D3R

JDOCS ProceduresThe Austin Group operates under the JDOCSprocedures Procedures approved by the threeorganizations IEEE PASC The Open Group ISO SC22 Officers Chair Three organizational Reps (Ors)8

Original Objectives2001 EditionTo target the joint specification at theprogrammer / user rather than the systemimplementer Organization based on the Core volumes ofthe Single UNIX Specification, organizedalphabetically, and including Rationale To produce a new standard in year 2001. 9

IEEE Std 1003.1,ISO/IEC 9945The Open Group BaseSpecifications10DefinitionsCommandsSystem InterfacesRationaleThe Common Specification

200x Revision11

200x Revision ObjectivesTo continue to target the joint specification atthe programmer / user rather than the systemimplementer Organization based on the Austin Group 2004Edition To update the specification to reflect currentexisting practice To produce a new standard in year 2008. 12

Goals for the 200x revisionProduction of a single document to beadopted by multiple parties Minimize the number of changes required toimplementations of earlier versions of theBase documents for the revision . Alignment with the ISO C 1999 standard (andall its TC) 13

Base Documents 200xRevision IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition/The Open Group TechnicalStandard Base Specifications, Issue 6, 2004Edition/ISO/IEC 9945:2003 Parts 1 to 4, with ISO/IEC9945:2003/Cor.1:2004(E) Parts 1 to 414 ISO/IEC 9899:1999 Programming Languages C. The Open Group Extended API Sets Parts 1 through 4

Scope of Changes Issues raised by defect reports and interpretations Issues arising from ISO TR 24715:2006,"Conflicts betweenPOSIX and the LSB" Changes to make the text self consistent with the additionalmaterial merged Features, marked Legacy or obsolescent in the Base documents,will be considered for withdrawal in the revision15 A review and reorganization of the options within the standard Alignment with the ISO/IEC 9899:1999 standard includingtechnical corrigendum 2

200x Roadmap16

Austin Group Hi-Level RoadmapJan20062005InterpretationNotes to Ed.ExternalSpecsIdentifiedPOSIX1003.1, 2004EditionISO CTC217July20062008 003.1, 200xEdition

Austin Group Roadmap 20062006Jun302006ExternalSpecsInterpretationNotes to Ed.POSIX1003.1, 2004EditionJul 312006D1ROct312006D2RFeature completeISO CTC21003.1a,IssuesRaised in1003.2b,SD/51003.2d1831 Jan 2007D2R ReviewFirst IEEE ballotISO Concurrent CD registrationand ballot

Austin Group Roadmap 20072007June 152007Sept2007F2F MeetingD2R Review1st IEEE ballot (60 days)Austin Group ballot (60 days)F2F MeetingD3RD3.1D3.2D4RISO FCD Ballot (4 month)2nd IEEE ballot (45 days)Austin Group ballot (60 days)1915 Dec 2007The Open Group Company review3rd IEEE ballot (30 days)

Austin Group Roadmap 20082008April 12008F2F MeetingD4R Review4th IEEE ballot (30 days)Austin Group ballot (45 days)20D5RISO FDIS Ballot (2 month)June 302008

Meeting Goal 21The goal of this meeting is to review draft 3comments for the 200x revision, and continueprocessing inbound defect reports so that theycan be addressed in draft 4

Meeting Outputs Instructions to the editors for D4R D3R aardvark reports Interpretations and SD5 changes (editorial &informative) arising from 2004 Ed aardvarkreports 22Workplan update

Draft Development Methodology23

Aardvark “The bug eater”A formal commenting format Used to collect written comments on specificreview documents. Phrased in terms of specific wording changes. Bugs submitted in this way can then be moreeasily discussed at relevant working groupmeetings, or voted on by email. 24

Aardvark Classifications Objections If you would vote against approval of thesubmission if that issue is not resolved Comments Where you believe a better solution is available,but the issue would not cause you to vote no Editorials Not discussed at the meeting unless the editorswish to25

Aardvark Totals (Drafts)Aardvark Note: D1 D7 2001 Edition, D1R 200x Edition26D6D7D1RD2RD3R

Aardvark Comments (D3R)Aardvark counts10181XSH61XCUXBD41211ObjectionEditorialNote: D1 D7 2001 Edition, D3R 200x Edition27Comment

Pro-forma Responses 28R1.Reject: The requirement is from a base document and to change it is out ofscope. Bringing it in scope would require an interpretation, corrigenda or resolutionfrom the appropriate body.R2. Reject: this interface is not a candidate for Legacy, the list of Legacyinterfaces was considered in TBD and is now final. It is widely used in historicpractise and deprecating this interface would break the contract with theapplication developer.R3. Reject: we cannot see the problem at the referenced lines, as such thiscomment is non responsive.R4: Reject: no action is specified in the aardvark comment.R5: Reject; The review team disagrees with the problem statement because. .{further rationale needed}R6: Reject: The review team believes that accepting the proposed change woulddecrease consensus.R7: Reject: The review team considers the interface name part of existing practiseand should be left as is.

BallotingCommittee draft balloting Concurrent IEEE and ISO balloting The Open Group company review ballot Recirculation ballots TC ballot processes 29

Draft Maintenance ProceduresSee Austin/112r2 Aardvark defect reports are generated andaccepted Production of responses to aardvark defectreports including technical corrigenda interpretations 30A policy on new work items proposed for afuture revision.

Scope of Technical CorrigendaChanges a. In scope of the original n 9r6.txtb. Non controversial ( a TC is intended to passballot at the first attempt) c. No new APIs (functions/utilities), however itmay add enumeration symbol and non function#defines and reserve additional namespaces. d. Typical use to fix contradictions in thestandard, add consistency between thestandard and overriding standards, and to fixsecurity related problems 31

Interpretations ProcessAn interpretation does not change the meaningof the standard. Notes to the editor (not part of the formalinterpretation) are expected to be consideredin the next revision of the standard. An interpretation may be controversial. There are formal rules for the interpretationsprocess, and proforma guidelines forresponses 32

New Work ItemsFrom time to time, an aardvark defect reportmay propose new work items that are outsidethe scope of maintenance The Austin Group is not a development bodyfor new material apart from integration issuesarising from the merger of the approvedstandards that were the Base documents intothe revision. 33

Criteria for New Work Items 341. A written specification must exist that hasundergone a formal consensus based approvalprocess and is suitable for inclusion.2.There must be an implementation, preferably areference implementation.3.The specification must be "sponsored" by one ofthree organizations (The Open Group, IEEE,SC22) within the Austin Group,4.Submitters must provide an outline plan of theediting instructions to merge the document withthe Austin Group specifications

Further Information The Austin Group http://www.opengroup.org/austin The IEEE PASC Web Site http://www.pasc.org The Single UNIX Specification http://www.UNIX systems.org35

How You Can Help? To participate in the Austin Group, visit theweb site (you can join the mailing lists) http://www.opengroup.org/austin/36

Background SlidesHow we got to here.37

Scope of the 2001 EditionProduction of a single document to beadopted by multiple parties Minimize the number of changes required toimplementations of earlier versions of theBase documents for the revision Limit new work items to those related tointegration and consistency, resolving anyconflicts Alignment with the ISO C 1999 standard 38

ment Set

Roadmap2001 Edition20001999POSIXamendments1d,1g,1j,1qPOSIX.1 1996Single UNIXSpecificationVersion 2POSIX.2 1993Draft 1JointRevisionDraft 5Review draft1003.1a,1003.2b,1003.2dISO C99402H20012001SanityReviewRevisedStandard

IEEE Std 1003.1,ISO/IEC 9945The Open Group BaseSpecifications Issue 641DefinitionsCommandsSystem InterfacesRationaleThe Common Specification

Approvals Status2001 EditionThe Open Group September 12th 2001 IEEE December 6th 2001 ISO/IEC 9945:2002 Parts 1 thru 4, November2002 Published in hardcopy (3700 pages, 9kg!!),electronic and CDROM 42

Technical Corrigendum 1IEEE December 2002 The Open Group February 2003 2003 Edition of Specifications published March31st 2003 ISO/IEC 9945:2003 August 2003 43

Technical Corrigendum 2The Open Group December 2003 IEEE February 2004 2004 Edition published April 30th 2004 IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition 44ISO Technical Corrigenda approved Sep 2004

Portability 5823904891304001992000SingleUNIX V345SVID3POSIXSingle Single XPG4UNIX V2 UNIX Base 1003.1 1996 BaseAESPOSIX1003.21003.1 90FIPS 151 2

Interface Count (2001 : XSH, XCU and XBD are in the Common Specifications46XcursesTotal 1742

Formal Standards AlignmentIEEE Std 1003.1,2004 Edition (POSIX.1) ISO/IEC 9945:2003 (ISO POSIX) ISO TC1 The Base Specifications Issue 6 is technicallyidentical to POSIX.1 and ISO POSIX, they areall one and the same document 47ISO/IEC 9899:1999, ProgrammingLanguages – C (ISO C)

Documentation GrantsLinux Man pages project FreeBSD Project NetBSD project Heirloom Toolkit and other tools (GunnarRitter) Joerg Schilling pax and find Jens Schweikhardt Book 48

Firefox Search Plugin 49Add the Austin Group specification to yourFirefox Search or Mozilla Search e unix.org&submitform Search

IEEE Std 1003.1 (POSIX.1) (incl former 1003.2) The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 6 ISO/IEC 9945 (they are the same document!) 5 About the Austin Group 522 Participants (mailing list members as of September 2007 (was 532 in September 2006) .