From: (Nicholas "M." Stoughton)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Standards Update, POSIX.0: Guide to \s-1POSIX\s+1 OSE
Date: 30 Aug 1993 22:59:54 -0700
Organization: UseNIX Standards Report Editor
Lines: 132
Sender: s...@rodan.UU.NET
Approved: (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan - comp.std.unix)
Message-ID: <25upcqINNptr@rodan.UU.NET>
Reply-To: std-u...@uunet.UU.NET

Submitted-by: (Nicholas "M." Stoughton)

               USENIX Standards Report Editor

   Nicholas M. Stoughton <>, Report Editor


Kevin Lewis <> reports on the July
16-20, 1993 meeting in Denver, Co.:

For the first time in a long while (in fact possibly since
the first meeting in March 1988), we had a very loose
meeting schedule, essentially as the document is in the
hands of our production editor, Hal Jespersen, who is
producing the next draft of the guide.  This is to be an
interim draft, which will be numbered 15A, and will serve
strictly as a accountability draft.  The section leaders
will use this interim draft to ensure that all of the
changes they submitted as a result of ballot resolution have
been made.  Once this is turned around, Hal will produce
draft 16, which will be sent to the IEEE for recirculation
and forwarded to SC22 through WG15 for Committee Document
(CD) registration.  The goal is to commence the
recirculation by late August.

The group met with POSIX.22, formerly known as the
Distributed Security Study Group, to discuss how its work
should relate to the work of POSIX.0 and to discuss the
possible future integration in the POSIX guide.  What is
meant by ``integration'' is yet to be defined.  We may
actually decide to insert the final product into a future
revision of the POSIX.0 Guide or simply point to it.  One
key concern that arose out of the joint session is the
apparent decomposition of the application platform as
proposed by POSIX.22 in order to expose other API's for
security purposes.  This conflicts with the model developed
by POSIX.  Given that the last comment on this issue from a
Double Deuce member was preceded by his pounding his fist on
the table, it became apparent that no consensus was going to
be reached.  The groups agreed to meet again jointly during
the October 1993 meeting, in Bethesda.

The group held another joint meeting with POSIX.18, which is
developing the POSIX Interactive System Application
Environment Profile (AEP).  This work is quite important to
POSIX.0 because it serves as a real live profile that can be
submitted to ISO as an ISP.  It can also serve as a model
for future profiling work and makes the concept of profiles
a real one.  The chair of POSIX.18 started by informing us
that the profile would be held in limbo until other base
standards work that served as normative references within
the profile was completed.  We argued (in an encouraging
tone, of course) that these standards should be placed in an

annex in order to allow this work to go to ballot.  Later in
the week, the POSIX.18 working group agreed to take this

The remainder of the week was spent discussing the issue of
future of our own work.  This started in our normal
``organized chaos'' manner.  Being creative during a period
when we've had to be quite ballot- focused was a challenge.
The result of the discussion yielded three areas that appear
at present to be the priority for future work:

  - distributed processing,

  - system and fault management, and

  - user profiles.

Individuals with interests in each of these areas agreed to
write up draft Project Authorization Requests (PARs) for
each topic with the objective of discussing them during the
October meeting.  These PARs are for discussion only and not
for submission to the PASC SEC just yet.  The group also
agreed to invite some folks from outside the POSIX effort to
come in and give us some ideas on what we should be
considering for future work.  These will be from the OSE
Implementors Workshop (OIW) and SC21.

As the meeting concluded, the co-chair reminded the group
not to forget that we still had the goal of getting over the
hump of our first recirculation to which a note of consensus
was reached with a collective sigh.

Volume-Number: Volume 32, Number 50

			  SCO's Case Against IBM

November 12, 2003 - Jed Boal from Eyewitness News KSL 5 TV provides an
overview on SCO's case against IBM. Darl McBride, SCO's president and CEO,
talks about the lawsuit's impact and attacks. Jason Holt, student and 
Linux user, talks about the benefits of code availability and the merits 
of the SCO vs IBM lawsuit. See SCO vs IBM.

Note: The materials and information included in these Web pages are not to
be used for any other purpose other than private study, research, review
or criticism.