From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MALFORMED_FREEMAIL,MISSING_HEADERS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:146::1]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A666269B1 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 20:35:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596364312B; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:35:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wm1-x330.google.com (mail-wm1-x330.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::330]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A014C4282A for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:35:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wm1-x330.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-424ad289949so9621865e9.2 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 11:35:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1719426944; x=1720031744; darn=tuhs.org; h=cc:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6bVdY9H91L6zXkNjR7kb3xc2UcQMfsdZyFR5OkduKrs=; b=RKBlKOvMKOhz3xvWFC6m6udEa2Kwb/W67pFfTS/G4V2rtQWe7HulXmnUMvxkKBdnxF N6BroKYNiQQ1V/3roRZ6LbCLdsVrbPaf5WMvTfMmXpukIhcz/5dPvJhNiS80F21OeW5X G1LgSdej2bkBtI9t8HJU90HzodjjR4U+CYHg11+FRQguak+RRcbIkRLY93ZoOAb+Ysy8 maZmP5JJHMCx2C6HSACKkiz9/ZtXMByuikEDXVh2WPla1eJjaCxCliXakBc7VhqJLiN6 H5V5I4iPwvGcIYqxJbawWyZdJ/jbXwdObHcOkd/KfUst1ODr1YPir5BzJnz78aBYAbt/ z3Nw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719426944; x=1720031744; h=cc:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6bVdY9H91L6zXkNjR7kb3xc2UcQMfsdZyFR5OkduKrs=; b=Vvb2hVMATcefFixq8kM8BQgpAlBOFLn86IpKFRTN6TE5iEocoeRZP1HOnSlHFOKURo Il2MnGyoKSSOuv2lSlkS+ACC7PHM9qCn1PoAdOn6TY1oxCcV1OskP/ScuuO/H0qNCMSF +8D5gT0CVJEGBGt+nH/SviJKCIWvB3j4g015b6jUUT7Vh4EmT7aG5GUj6iAV11mbABCd Cf2pOXBQDFJgntglUnhXrtcXb9BJHTLOrWb44HBeDIKL+phIvS0/wkK+lNEOOP7hNvmo HZac5FRa+aIwuKm7exBVSo/VaGrbuOxTVhdcmnzluXncAhZmdQP1/Y+tnZqQrv7Wo833 YWFw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwaAFmDhDyo8eBtp476ZWYhbCd6Ez63UGbTlPKD/EEzd8dUsRkk vuozKyHkP8Yn+tozxSgAqM6SDIXICyk907T/Kn2dxkguHao6mGt2+iPHdcOg8fgu3zt8kds3QxN 174ola+ojFeErn5uyNke9irDyjOQq2tA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFj3XevRYanj9n9PuNX+qpyVUSpkI6Ymt+mBsnc3lGLCQkpwlbAYd8GRiLTj7gYoaVivX1hvvfynCMBGbvYDf4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1d28:b0:424:8e37:f4ba with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4248e37f64dmr70647005e9.3.1719426943591; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 11:35:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Marc Rochkind Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 12:35:32 -0600 Message-ID: Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000030ad7a061bcf4802" Message-ID-Hash: FI3K76GKBT26HHK6JAFYZ7QTPTUGWMG4 X-Message-ID-Hash: FI3K76GKBT26HHK6JAFYZ7QTPTUGWMG4 X-MailFrom: mrochkind@gmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: ANSI (C) vs IEEE (POSIX) Standards Body Selection List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --00000000000030ad7a061bcf4802 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think historically ANSI did languages. But, I don't know specifically why IEEE became the standards body for POSIX. I did participate for a while in the IEEE standards process (not POSIX, but something else), and I knew it as a large, very active, well managed organization, always eager to take on new things (such as the thing that I was engaged in). So maybe that was one reason. Maybe a greater reason is that the part of IEEE standards that did software was chaired by a person from DEC (forgot his name). I'm sure DEC had a strong interest in a UNIX-based standard, if only to make sure that it didn't go completely wild and negate DEC's huge head start in selling machines to run UNIX. Marc On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 12:22=E2=80=AFPM segaloco via TUHS = wrote: > Good morning, I was wondering if anyone has the scoop on the rationale > behind the selection of standards bodies for the publication of UNIX and > UNIX-adjacent standards. C was published via the ANSI route as X3.159, > whereas POSIX was instead published by the IEEE route as 1003.1. Was the= re > every any consideration of C through IEEE or POSIX through ANSI instead? > Is there an appreciable difference suggested by the difference in > publishers? In any case, both saw subsequent adoption by ISO/IEC, so the > track to an international standard seems to lead to the same organization= s. > > - Matt G. > --=20 *My new email address is mrochkind@gmail.com * --00000000000030ad7a061bcf4802 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think historically ANSI did languages.

But, I don't know specifically why IEEE became the standards body for= POSIX. I did participate for a while in the IEEE standards process (not PO= SIX, but something else), and I knew it as a large, very active, well manag= ed organization, always eager to take on new things (such as the thing that= I was engaged in). So maybe that was one reason.

= Maybe a greater reason is that the part of IEEE standards that did software= was chaired by a person from DEC (forgot his name). I'm sure DEC had a= strong interest in a UNIX-based standard, if only to make sure that it did= n't go completely wild and negate DEC's huge head start in selling = machines to run UNIX.

Marc

On Wed, Jun 26, 20= 24 at 12:22=E2=80=AFPM segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
Good morning, I was wondering if anyone has the scoop on th= e rationale behind the selection of standards bodies for the publication of= UNIX and UNIX-adjacent standards.=C2=A0 C was published via the ANSI route= as X3.159, whereas POSIX was instead published by the IEEE route as 1003.1= .=C2=A0 Was there every any consideration of C through IEEE or POSIX throug= h ANSI instead?=C2=A0 Is there an appreciable difference suggested by the d= ifference in publishers?=C2=A0 In any case, both saw subsequent adoption by= ISO/IEC, so the track to an international standard seems to lead to the sa= me organizations.

- Matt G.


--
My new email address is mrochkind@gmail.com
--00000000000030ad7a061bcf4802--