austin-group-l  

Messages by Thread

• [Aardvark Bugs 0001999]: Session timeouts too short Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Mark Brown via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Mark Brown via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001998]: Where should MANTIS issues be submitted? Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 17th August 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [Issue 8 drafts 0001997]: cp,mv,pax should not need to diagnose timestamp downresing Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001996]: Add SIGEV_SIGNAL_THREAD to allow more efficient handling of sigevent-using functions. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 10th August 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001995]: Add SHM_ANON to shm_open() Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001995]: Add SHM_ANON to shm_open() Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001995]: Add SHM_ANON to shm_open() Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001995]: Add SHM_ANON to shm_open() Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2008)/Issue 7 0001994]: exp() assumes default rounding Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2008)/Issue 7 0001994]: exp() assumes default rounding Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 27th July 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001993]: pthread_create() should allow failure with ENOMEM, not just EAGAIN Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001993]: pthread_create() should allow failure with ENOMEM, not just EAGAIN Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001993]: pthread_create() should allow failure with ENOMEM, not just EAGAIN Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Interpretation Proposed: bug 1987 Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 20th July 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001992]: Add getexepath() to retrieve the absolute pathname of the current process executable image. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Interpretations Proposed: bugs 1991, 1984, 1979 Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001984]: Ambiguous requirements for command -v on printing absolute pathnames Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001984]: Ambiguous requirements for command -v on printing absolute pathnames Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001984]: Ambiguous requirements for command -v on printing absolute pathnames Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 9th July 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• P1003.1/Austin Group Status report July 2026 Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001991]: touch -d 2026-06-29T00:00:60 should not be required to succeed Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001991]: touch -d 2026-06-29T00:00:60 should not be required to succeed Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [Issue 8 drafts 0001991]: touch -d 2026-06-29T00:00:60 should not be required to succeed Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [Issue 8 drafts 0001991]: touch -d 2026-06-29T00:00:60 should not be required to succeed Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [Issue 8 drafts 0001991]: touch -d 2026-06-29T00:00:60 should not be required to succeed Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [Issue 8 drafts 0001991]: touch -d 2026-06-29T00:00:60 should not be required to succeed Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• math functions and default rounding Fred J. Tydeman via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: math functions and default rounding Nick Stoughton via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: math functions and default rounding Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: math functions and default rounding Fred J. Tydeman via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: math functions and default rounding Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 2nd July 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001987]: The option value type for TCP_NODELAY is not specified. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001987]: The option value type for TCP_NODELAY is not specified. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001987]: The option value type for TCP_NODELAY is not specified. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001987]: The option value type for TCP_NODELAY is not specified. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001987]: The option value type for TCP_NODELAY is not specified. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001987]: The option value type for TCP_NODELAY is not specified. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001548]: Addition of a POSIX.utf-8 locale (likely as 7.3 "POSIX.utf-8 locale") Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001990]: This is a configuration test issue. Please ignore if you see this. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• inconsistency about the printf utility concerning LC_NUMERIC Vincent Lefevre via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: inconsistency about the printf utility concerning LC_NUMERIC Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: inconsistency about the printf utility concerning LC_NUMERIC Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: inconsistency about the printf utility concerning LC_NUMERIC Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: inconsistency about the printf utility concerning LC_NUMERIC Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: inconsistency about the printf utility concerning LC_NUMERIC Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 18th June 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001986]: This is a configuration test issue. Please ignore if you see this. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001986]: This is a configuration test issue. Please ignore if you see this. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001986]: This is a configuration test issue. Please ignore if you see this. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001986]: This is a configuration test issue. Please ignore if you see this. Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Hans Åberg via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: UTF-32 characters Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 4th June 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 28th May 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Interpretation proposed: 0001982: probably-unintended wording difference with ISO C in mbrtowc(3) and mbrtowcs(3) Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [Aardvark Bugs 0000298]: Need a way to refer to the note being added in an update Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [Aardvark Bugs 0000228]: Mantis sends quoted <newline> characters instead of real ones in Password Reset mail Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [Aardvark Bugs 0000204]: Fix Message-ID headers in next version of Mantis (Tracker notifications have incorrect mail headers) Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [Aardvark Bugs 0000116]: Ability to search on Line Number 0 Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001981]: Request to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001981]: Request to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001981]: Request to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001981]: Request to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001981]: Request to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001982]: probably-unintended wording difference with ISO C in mbrtowc(3) and mbrtowcs(3) Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001982]: probably-unintended wording difference with ISO C in mbrtowc(3) and mbrtowcs(3) Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 21st May 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001979]: conflicting specification for open("existing-directory", O_RDONLY | O_CREAT, 0644) Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001979]: conflicting specification for open("existing-directory", O_RDONLY | O_CREAT, 0644) Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • [1003.1(2024)/Issue8 0001979]: conflicting specification for open("existing-directory", O_RDONLY | O_CREAT, 0644) Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Looking for the possibility to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Looking for the possibility to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Looking for the possibility to define ssize_t as the signed version of size_t Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Jonathan Wakely via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? G. Branden Robinson via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Dan Cross via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Jonathan Wakely via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Jonathan Wakely via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Harald van Dijk via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Can ssize_t be introduced into C2y? Yonggang Luo via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Minutes of the 14th May 2026 Teleconference Andrew Josey via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• I am curiously about if the sizeof intptr_t sizeof ptrdiff_t and sizeof uintptr_t are the same? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: I am curiously about if the sizeof intptr_t sizeof ptrdiff_t and sizeof uintptr_t are the same? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: I am curiously about if the sizeof intptr_t sizeof ptrdiff_t and sizeof uintptr_t are the same? Mark Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: I am curiously about if the sizeof intptr_t sizeof ptrdiff_t and sizeof uintptr_t are the same? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: I am curiously about if the sizeof intptr_t sizeof ptrdiff_t and sizeof uintptr_t are the same? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: I am curiously about if the sizeof intptr_t sizeof ptrdiff_t and sizeof uintptr_t are the same? 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) via austin-group-l at The Open Group
• Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? Niu Danny via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? Guy Harris via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? Joerg Wunsch via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Fw: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? shwaresyst via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? Joerg Wunsch via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? G. Branden Robinson via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? David A. Wheeler via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open Group
  • Re: Fw: Do we still want to maintain SCCS and UUCP? Alan Coopersmith via austin-group-l at The Open Group

• Earlier messages