[task #15706] Defining coding conventions

[Boud Roukema]

Follow-up Comment #2, task #15706 (project reproduce):

I didn't realise point 2) - that we use Dash in the _basic.mk_ step. I may
have noticed it and forgot.

The wider task name makes sense.

I agree on the question of portability, but we also want long-term
reproducibility, and we don't want to sacrifice security. :) 

With the anecdote: do you mean people using a _shell_ (binary) that was
written in 2006? or that the _shell script_ was written in 2006?

I think that we should only require compatibility with an open-access
standard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX#Versions

* POSIX.1-2001 =  IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 = _Single UNIX Specification version 3_
- but this is _not_ open-access: http://www.unix.org/version3/online.html
https://publications.opengroup.org/t041
_"This document set for the Single UNIX Specification, Version 3 (UNIX 03).
The PDF documents are only available to employees of members of The Open
Group."_
* IEEE Std 1003.1-2004 _does_ seem to be online:
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/
* https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2008edition/ -
_"POSIX.1-2008 is simultaneously IEEE Std 1003.1-2008 and The Open Group
Technical Standard Base Specifications, Issue 7"_

Section 2.6.2 of POSIX.1-2008 -
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2008edition/ - seems to give
the equivalent of POSIX-1.2017 - for requiring ${parameter} to be recognised.

These pages seem to be well-archived:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200516232627/https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/
lists 459 snapshots for the top page.

How about 1) IEEE Std 1003.1-2004; 2)+3) POSIX.1-2017 ?

I don't know if there exists an informal name POSIX.1-2004 for IEEE Std
1003.1-2004.



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?15706>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.nongnu.org/