Comments on "On the covering radius of codes" [with reply]

The commenters point out that with the definition of the norm of a code as originally given in the above-titled paper (see ibid., vol.IT 31, p.385-401, May 1985), certain results do not hold. However, with the corrected definition given by G.D. Cohen et al. (see ibid., vol.IT 32, p.680-94, Sept. 1986), they do hold. they also point out that the hypotheses of Lemma 27 of the above-titled paper need modification, which they provide. The authors´ reply that they were aware of the problems with the definition of norm and thank the commenters for their correction to Lemma 27.<>