POSIX P1003.5

POSIX P1003.5

[Kenneth Anderson]

In the comp.lang.ada FAQ made available by the Ada Information Clearinghouse,
the answer to question 23 states:

      The POSIX P1003.5 committee is trying to work out an arrangement
      with the IEEE to make the POSIX/Ada package specifications
      available for distribution via email and anonymous FTP.

Has there been any change in status on this?  I.E. have the package
specifications been made available yet?

Just wondering,

Ken Anderson

Re: POSIX P1003.5

[cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!do]

>In the comp.lang.ada FAQ made available by the Ada Information Clearinghouse,
>the answer to question 23 states:
>
>      The POSIX P1003.5 committee is trying to work out an arrangement
>      with the IEEE to make the POSIX/Ada package specifications
>      available for distribution via email and anonymous FTP.
>
>Has there been any change in status on this?  I.E. have the package
>specifications been made available yet?
>
>Just wondering,

Yes, sort of. I have made, for the GNAT project, an implementation (~ 80%) of
the POSIX P1003.5 binding to Ada.

I know that it is not complete and some features I used was not portable and
some others was in conflic with the task system of Ada...

Anyway, at least 80% of the packages specifications are available via e-mail to
me.


Pascal.

PS : Somebody (Michael...) made some fixes to make my work more portable across
     compilers.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Pascal OBRY			e-mail: pascal.obry@der.edf.fr |
| EDF-DER-IPN-SID-ISI					       |
| Bureau G1-010			voice: +33-1-47.65.50.91       |
| 1 Av General de Gaulle				       |
| 92141 Clamart CEDEX		     			       |
| FRANCE			     			       |
----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: POSIX P1003.5

[agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!seas.g]

In article <PASCALO.93Aug10170544@cln49ie.fr> pascalo@cln49ie.fr (Pascal Obry) 
writes:
>
>>In the comp.lang.ada FAQ made available by the Ada Information Clearinghouse,
>>the answer to question 23 states:
>>
>>      The POSIX P1003.5 committee is trying to work out an arrangement
>>      with the IEEE to make the POSIX/Ada package specifications
>>      available for distribution via email and anonymous FTP.
>>
>>Has there been any change in status on this?  I.E. have the package
>>specifications been made available yet?
>>
>>Just wondering,
>
>Yes, sort of. I have made, for the GNAT project, an implementation (~ 80%) of
>the POSIX P1003.5 binding to Ada.
>
>I know that it is not complete and some features I used was not portable and
>some others was in conflic with the task system of Ada...
>
>Anyway, at least 80% of the packages specifications are available via e-mail t
o
>me.
>
Are these ready to send to, say, PAL? Or with the NYU distribution?
>
>Pascal.
>
>PS : Somebody (Michael...) made some fixes to make my work more portable acros
s
>     compilers.

Even better. When do they go into full distribution?

Mike Feldman

Re: POSIX P1003.5

[Jim Lonjers]

In article <9308091014.aa06774@Paris.ics.uci.edu> kanderso@mabillon.ICS.UCI.EDU
 (Kenneth Anderson) writes:
>In the comp.lang.ada FAQ made available by the Ada Information Clearinghouse,
>the answer to question 23 states:
>
>      The POSIX P1003.5 committee is trying to work out an arrangement
>      with the IEEE to make the POSIX/Ada package specifications
>      available for distribution via email and anonymous FTP.
>
>Has there been any change in status on this?  I.E. have the package
>specifications been made available yet?

Unfortunately, not.  The legal issues have been in the mill for over a year
now, and the process of getting the IEEE to specify the proper copyright
and distribution instructions has been underway for about 3 months.  A
notice will be posted to this group as soon as they are available.

Jim

Re: POSIX P1003.5

[Robert Dewar]

Regarding this issue, is the IEEE spec copyrighted, I mean the actual Ada
code in the spec. If so, then what is the implication of this copyright.
Can people freely copy just the Ada code? Can they modify it? 

The whole business of copyrighting specs (just one small step removed from
copyrighting the look and feel of interfaces) is worrisome. 

Re: POSIX P1003.5

[Gary Morris @ignite]

In <PASCALO.93Aug10170544@cln49ie.fr> pascalo@cln49ie.fr (Pascal Obry) writes:
>>      The POSIX P1003.5 committee is trying to work out an arrangement
>>      with the IEEE to make the POSIX/Ada package specifications
>>      available for distribution via email and anonymous FTP.
>>
>>Has there been any change in status on this?  I.E. have the package
>>specifications been made available yet?

>Yes, sort of. I have made, for the GNAT project, an implementation (~ 80%) of
>the POSIX P1003.5 binding to Ada.

>Anyway, at least 80% of the packages specifications are available via e-mail t
o
>me.

Doesn't the copyright on the POSIX standard, which includes the Ada
specifications, mean that the POSIX Ada specs are copyrighted by IEEE?  

That was my understanding, in which case the implementation specific version
of the specs developed for GNAT should be derived works, copyrighted by IEEE
and the GNAT project. 

--GaryM
-- 
Gary Morris                       Internet: garym@alsys.com
Alsys Inc, San Diego, CA          Phone:    +1 619-457-2700 x128

Re: POSIX P1003.5

[cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.kei.com!ub!dsinc!gvls1!lonjers]

In article <24alhg$3p5@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wr
ites:
>Regarding this issue, is the IEEE spec copyrighted, I mean the actual Ada
>code in the spec. If so, then what is the implication of this copyright.
>Can people freely copy just the Ada code? Can they modify it? 
>
>The whole business of copyrighting specs (just one small step removed from
>copyrighting the look and feel of interfaces) is worrisome. 

Because the entire book is copyrighted, the specs are copyrighted, also.

The IEEE does not want to get into anything as awful as the look and feel
fiasco, they are just intensly cautious.  They want to do the right thing.

I got a message from the IEEE today indicating that there is no longer a
problem with public distribution of package specs, but I have not seen the
revised copyright notices.

As soon as I can, I will be posting further notes on the subject.

Of course, the only thing covered by the IEEE copyright are the package
specs.  Any implementation of the POSIX Ada bindings would be covered by
the creator's copyright.  I assume the GNAT implementation would be covered
by copyleft, right?