From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Tue Aug 2 15:41:11 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E44BACCF6; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:41:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E58071B3E; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:41:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id E4B2818A1; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:41:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:41:10 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Pedro Giffuni Cc: Guido Falsi , svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Mikhail Teterin , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r303047 - head/usr.bin/sed Message-ID: <20160802154110.GA22737@FreeBSD.org> References: <201607192256.u6JMuewv007503@repo.freebsd.org> <20160802141738.GA84154@FreeBSD.org> <51d8013e-bc4b-a511-306d-0e362a8c3e86@madpilot.net> <7f8c5c42-7d2f-ffcf-70dd-dbc9d3202ee7@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7f8c5c42-7d2f-ffcf-70dd-dbc9d3202ee7@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:41:11 -0000 On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:03:20AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > Hello; > > [...] > Thank you for the reports, this type of things make nice cases for the > test suite. > > There were good reasons this patch was not meant for 11.0-RELEASE. Given > it's the second regression and I am not satisfied with the patch for the > first one, I will be reverting the change so we can look at the problems > integrally. >From a software engineer point, I fully support this decision. sed(1) is very important part of FreeBSD's repertoire, and any changes to it must not be committed unless fully understood and well tested (on a personal note, not being satisfied with the patch for the first [regression] is already a good enough reason for a backout -- merely IMHO). Thank you. ./danfe