Skip to main content
Unix & Linux

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • 3
    I don't think they actually claim to be POSIX compliant anywhere. Interestingly, the application name is 10 characters long so they fail on that front too. BTW, the way I read point 2 is "it should only include lower case and digits - I think the final "only" covers the entire clause. Maybe a question for english.stackexchange.com :) Commented Apr 10, 2017 at 10:22
  • 3
    XBD defines should as follows: "For an implementation that conforms to IEEE Std 1003.1-XXXX, describes a feature or behavior that is recommended but not mandatory. An application should not rely on the existence of the feature or behavior. An application that relies on such a feature or behavior cannot be assured to be portable across conforming implementations. For an application, describes a feature or behavior that is recommended programming practice for optimum portability." Commented Apr 10, 2017 at 10:37
  • 5
    Does the naming of an application have anything to do with the naming of system utilities? Commented Apr 10, 2017 at 11:48
  • 1
    @IlmariKaronen Correct. The guidelines are for implementing the utilities described in the standard itself. Commented Apr 10, 2017 at 17:16
  • 3
    There is an "only" in the sentence you quoted. It comes at an awkward point in the phrase, probably due to committee editing, but it still has the same effect. Commented Apr 10, 2017 at 20:25