IEEE Standards Interpretations for IEEE Std 1003.2™-1992 IEEE Standard for Information Technology--Portable Operating System Interfaces (POSIX®)--Part 2: Shell and Utilities
Copyright © 1996 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 3 Park Avenue New York, New York 10016-5997 USA All Rights Reserved.
Interpretations are issued to explain and clarify the intent of a standard and do not constitute an alteration to the original standard. In addition, interpretations are not intended to supply consulting information. Permission is hereby granted to download and print one copy of this document. Individuals seeking permission to reproduce and/or distribute this document in its entirety or portions of this document must contact the IEEE Standards Department for the appropriate license. Use of the information contained in this document is at your own risk.
IEEE Standards Department, Copyrights and Permissions, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey 08855-1331, USA
Interpretation Request #115
Topic: mailx visual command edits messages in sequence. Relevant Clauses: 18.104.22.168.38
In subclause 22.214.171.124.38 (Edit Messages with full-screen editor), the Extended Description of the mailx command, (P354, L6803-6806), it says: Synopsis: v[isual] [msglist] Edit the given messages with a screen editor. The messages shall be placed in a temporary file and the utility named by the VISUAL variable (see 126.96.36.199) shall be invoked to edit the file. The default editor shall be vi. While this language is clear, and corresponds well with the language in the SVID (mailx(au_cmd, p 6-50)), the actual historical behavior of this command should be expressed as follows: Edit the given messages. Each message shall be placed in a temporary file and the utility named by the VISUAL variable (see 188.8.131.52) shall be invoked to edit each file in sequence. The default editor shall be vi. I believe that this variance from actual historic practice was not intended. The rationale for mailx seems to carefully point out the cases where the standard differs from historic practice, but does not mention this issue.
The standard states the behavior for the visual command in mailx, and conforming implementations must conform to this. However, concerns have been raised about this which are being referred to the sponsor.
Rationale for Interpretation