Jim Meyering wrote: ... >> Thus, if we go this route, we are effectively saying >> that people who want self-consistent regex-handling >> in our tools must build with --with-included-regex or end >> up causing subtle problems. >> >> That's a big leap. >> I'm not saying I won't take upstream grep over the edge, >> but I'd like to hear what a few distro-maintainers think. > > To clarify... > I like Arnold's proposal to make regex range handling sane > and locale-independent. > > It goes like this (at least for gawk, grep and sed): > > change how dfa.c interprets ranges like [a-z] > change how gnulib's reg* code handles ranges > > Always use the included regex code (the one from gnulib), > so that its interpretation is consistent with that of dfa.c. > > Grep's current upstream default is to build --with-included-regex, > which makes grep use glibc's regex code. > > To make this proposed change go through, that configure-time option would > have to be eliminated, so that we always build with the gnulib-provided > regex code. Of course, if glibc ever changes, we can detect that and > automatically prefer it when possible.
For the record, at least Fedora's grep and sed both build --without-included-regex, so would be affected.
