rja7m@helga1.acc.Virginia.EDU (04/13/90)
From: rja7m@helga1.acc.Virginia.EDU I strongly feel that the moderator's position is correct. [ What? The moderator has expressed no opinion. I'm the moderator. I should know. All comments by the moderator are enclosed in [ -mod ] pairs or appear in articles signed by the moderator. -mod ] I'm generally of the opinion that the whole POSIX and P1201 process has gotten out of hand with too much premature standardisation and too many working groups and too much breadth. If a real-time system doesn't have or need a file system then it shouldn't try to be POSIX. Much of my present work involves real time controls and the notion that we should try to make them POSIX-compliant is laughable. Yes they are computers and they are programmable by the user but POSIX compliance for real-time controls that lack a file system is meaningless. It seems that a lot of vendors want to be able to say that they are "POSIX-compliant" without actually doing the work to make their products truly open and interoperable. The effort to water down the meaning of POSIX compliant appears to be rooted in such vendors' marketing desires rather than technical merit. Ran randall@virginia.edu Volume-Number: Volume 19, Number 63