From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 18 00:35:38 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5270B16A4CE; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:35:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hobbit.neveragain.de (neveragain.de [217.69.76.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72F0143D2D; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:35:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from amf@hobbit.neveragain.de) Received: from hobbit.neveragain.de (amf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) j1I0ZZpu032062 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 18 Feb 2005 01:35:35 +0100 Received: (from amf@localhost) by hobbit.neveragain.de (8.13.2/8.13.2/Submit) id j1I0ZZSe032061; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 01:35:35 +0100 Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 01:35:35 +0100 From: Dennis Koegel To: Peter Jeremy Message-ID: <20050218003534.GA31807@neveragain.de> References: <72c3a957050217031230598f63@mail.gmail.com> <86zmy3qmm2.wl%sf@FreeBSD.org> <72c3a957050217065223729f83@mail.gmail.com> <20050217185422.GJ57256@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050217185422.GJ57256@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> X-PGP-KeyID: 0D73E19A User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.4 (hobbit.neveragain.de [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 18 Feb 2005 01:35:35 +0100 (CET) cc: FUJISHIMA Satsuki cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Sergey Lyubka Subject: Re: pcre in base system X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:35:38 -0000 On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 05:54:22AM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: > Based on the NetBSD thread, pcre also has an area where it is not > POSIX compliant (and does not plan to become POSIX compliant) and does > not provide BREs. This may present a sticking point. Replacing the standard behaviour with PCREs definitely is a bad idea. But, well, it would actually be nice if PCREs would be available as an *option*. Analogue to grep, grep -E / sed, sed -E, ... one might have grep -P (and not confuse it with pgrep ;-), sed -P and so on. - D.