Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:10:10 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: Diomidis Spinellis <dds@aueb.gr>, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFT: BSD-licensed grep [Fwd: cvs commit: ports/textproc/bsdgrep Makefile distinfo] Message-ID: <20080618191010.GA81684@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <48593673.8030607@FreeBSD.org> References: <188001.76281.qm@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <48593673.8030607@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:23:15AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com wrote: > >On 2008-06-17, Gabor Kovesdan wrote: > >>>egrep: empty (sub)expression > >>> > >>I've looked at this and I have a patch with a workaround: > >>http://kovesdan.org/patches/grep.dougb.diff > > > >This general behavior should be considered a GNUism, the type of > >thing that we want to avoid in scripts. Perhaps, if it's too > >common, the workaround should be ifdef'd into a GNU compatible mode > >or something. > > No, "here is a new bsd grep, but change all your scripts that have > relied on legitimate behavior of grep in the past" is a non-starter. I > haven't checked POSIX to see whether the particular construction I am > using fits the spec or not, but I really don't care. We need to be > feature-compatible with the GNU versions of these tools, both for > legacy scripts and also for those users migrating over from linux. > FWIW, your RE violates strict conformance to Posix when the variable is unset. See 9.4.3 and 2.2.1 in SuSv3. -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080618191010.GA81684>