Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!uunet.UU.NET!sef
From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: access permissions in 1003.1
Message-ID: <1991Jun12.235808.20822@uunet.uu.net>
Date: 12 Jun 91 17:57:25 GMT
References: <1991Jun3.225808.8518@uunet.uu.net> <1991Jun5.201559.11784@uunet.uu.net> <1991Jun12.043706.18456@uunet.uu.net>
Sender: usenet@uunet.uu.net (UseNet News)
Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 17
Approved: sef@uunet.uu.net (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan - comp.std.unix)
Originator: sef@uunet.UU.NET
Nntp-Posting-Host: uunet.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)

In article <1991Jun12.043706.18456@uunet.uu.net> sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes:

   HP solved this, I believe (at least, according to an article in _The Journal
   of C Language Translation_).  I looked into this, way back when I was
   involved with development system work, and came up with a couple of
   solutions, at least one of which will likely be used.  (They're both fairly
   obvious.)

HP is *already* claiming Posix compliance, and you say one of the
solutions "will likely be used".  *That* is precisely the problem.

	-mib


Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 104