From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 15 01:42:21 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7845B16A4CE; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:42:21 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5E53E43D2D; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:42:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mux@freebsd.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1920)
	id 52F475CA3E; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:42:21 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 02:42:21 +0100
From: Maxime Henrion <mux@freebsd.org>
To: Zoltan Frombach <tssajo@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20041115014221.GF32839@elvis.mu.org>
References: <BAY2-DAV16kTgbLYluL0001ec55@hotmail.com>
	<1100476106.10768.4.camel@rushlight.kf8nh.com>
	<BAY2-DAV8cm9t0CI76r0001ef19@hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV8cm9t0CI76r0001ef19@hotmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Either I do something wrong or there is a regexp bug in sed !!
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:42:21 -0000

Zoltan Frombach wrote:
> You are right. My mistake. This indeed works:
> 
> sed -E -e "s/^[0-9]+/199/" conf-split > conf-split.new
> 
> Thanks for clearing this up.

For what it's worth, there is another way to write this regexp without
using the -E flag.  Since x+ == xx*, you can write it:
"s/^[0-9][0-9]*/199/".  The reason for not using -E is that it's not
portable, since it's not specified by the standard.  GNU sed uses -r for
extended REs.

Cheers,
Maxime