Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!longway!std-unix
From: terryl@tekcrl.labs.tek.com (Terry Laskodi)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Standards Update, IEEE 1003.0: POSIX Guide
Message-ID: <665@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 3 May 90 17:27:30 GMT
References: <661@longway.TIC.COM> <652@longway.TIC.COM> <626@longway.TIC.COM> <636@longway.TIC.COM>
Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM
Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 24
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)

From: Terry Laskodi <terryl@tekcrl.labs.tek.com>

In article <661@longway.TIC.COM>, cazier@mbunix.mitre.org (Cazier) writes:
>
>Why would any vendor feel "punished" because they can't meet some
>standard? I imagine there will be lots of OS's that can't meet the
>standards fully....but why should they feel punished?
>
>POSIX is not likely to impact your sales much, would it?

     If you sell to the federal government, then yes, sales probably would be
impacted a GREAT deal. Have you ever read the requirements for a fed bid on a
software project? Not a pretty sight. The specifications are just vague enough
such that (in UN*X, anyways), one scratches one's head and says "well,this spec
could probably be met by <insert-appropriate-un*x-command-here>".

     Hopefully, POSIX will reduce the amount of paperwork required for specs
quite a bit (hey, we can dream, can't we???).

				Terry Laskodi
				     of
				Tektronix

Volume-Number: Volume 19, Number 100