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=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham 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 A53D026A5B for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 19:56:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06904427C6; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 03:56:49 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuhs.org; s=dkim; t=1719424609; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-help: list-owner:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=FscZ9vzG6mewmg6CkMNRV4r2+fQp86WFSX6AH815V3g=; b=brySQviAfE9j2vK+3JbBotMcYsMuVcHP6GKUQw8LR1i4iiCCGVjQfU1dvV47jti/Mufuci ySiRhzvhKP/SaUjF2DXIp8SJEas4YC4Sraih1zT8seqUFYjKnoFHF7q1VcTOTU+9WU8P1D x5EBHjXrqKwibvgp1JYUCsG7heOaUPI= Received: from mail-4319.protonmail.ch (mail-4319.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.19]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44305427B7 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 03:56:42 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1719424600; x=1719683800; bh=FscZ9vzG6mewmg6CkMNRV4r2+fQp86WFSX6AH815V3g=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date: Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=e6PpBb7UoQidiqdyMFGb1itpT+4/8u0r6NBRzqzy0dTeFOG1QUlheP7z50dmMcMNZ 6POd8exqdHGAF7qfZAxTU5NtiJMQBhYUVZw/2FqbVui0zxnmkWgmHLBmcJPeMR6M0M M6EZ1IunPQBy4+aCyfrJMzLRs0RXXtmxj4wbZTyhYpUhhL3N1TstCN01GPaewSZPIM lW8EsRaxwUbI6G7mPtDYbWT24XEs+KBoUnJIY3UfVe7gzWrdwN4ImapXxRqrNPS42p 9jnSZCW9o1zJ8Z0gS6hhwsvIq5vTtXiAIib2p1Q4x4pdfVQjgM1wtBxLViW92CFH55 dj6wtIsXrlsAQ== Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 17:56:35 +0000 To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Message-ID: Feedback-ID: 35591162:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 9b07e805ee6ebd48b7f9a4111997eb92df61c941 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID-Hash: BWT77HEMYQU3X3EYCNOH7RULJ2XQ74LE X-Message-ID-Hash: BWT77HEMYQU3X3EYCNOH7RULJ2XQ74LE X-MailFrom: segaloco@protonmail.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] 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: From: segaloco via TUHS Reply-To: segaloco Good morning, I was wondering if anyone has the scoop on the rationale behi= nd the selection of standards bodies for the publication of UNIX and UNIX-a= djacent standards. C was published via the ANSI route as X3.159, whereas P= OSIX was instead published by the IEEE route as 1003.1. Was there every an= y consideration of C through IEEE or POSIX through ANSI instead? Is there = an appreciable difference suggested by the difference in publishers? In an= y case, both saw subsequent adoption by ISO/IEC, so the track to an interna= tional standard seems to lead to the same organizations. - Matt G.