Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:33:25 -0400 From: Lars Kellogg-Stedman <lars@oddbit.com> To: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sed argument processing b0rked? Message-ID: <BANLkTi=GpQ=%2Bs3CNynFEOPeofU8FYm7BXg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <BEAFC4EE-9F00-4852-BF6C-2AA5E6BC42AB@conundrum.com> References: <73E783DC-E32B-4DE3-AFF6-4A75D1D3A00A@conundrum.com> <BANLkTik40kE2ds2AvmjykaD3btui1paXkw@mail.gmail.com> <BEAFC4EE-9F00-4852-BF6C-2AA5E6BC42AB@conundrum.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Aha... I knew it had to be something. =C2=A0I couldn't quite wrap my head= around the idea that sed is misbehaving.. it seems way too old and set in = its ways for that. =C2=A0 However, I did get the -i'' syntax from somewhere= .. perhaps it's a GNUism and I just forgot where I picked it up. In GNU sed, the -i option does not require an argument, so "sed -i -e 's/a/b/' -e 's/c/d/' ..." is legal syntax.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTi=GpQ=%2Bs3CNynFEOPeofU8FYm7BXg>