Re: why are \d and \D not implemented but don't throw errors in regex?

2013-12-10 Thread Linda Walsh
On 12/7/2013 3:33 PM, Peter Cordes wrote: I agree your complaint seems valid, but it's the behaviour of the regex engine built into GNU libc (in this case). Bash on other platforms would use the regex engine in their system libc. (Unless I'm mistaken in my assumption that bash doesn't have i

Re: why are \d and \D not implemented but don't throw errors in regex?

2013-12-10 Thread Eric Blake
On 12/10/2013 01:28 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: > > An option: > > shopt -s regex=(basic|[extended]|pcre) > where 'extended' is the default would be a > great extension. But before bash takes on another library, it would be nicer to FIRST get libc patched to provide pcre regex by default. In other

Re: why are \d and \D not implemented but don't throw errors in regex?

2013-12-10 Thread Linda Walsh
On 12/10/2013 12:44 PM, Eric Blake wrote: Grep uses a third-party library (libpcre) to provide it's third syntax; if that library is not present at compilation, then you can't use that flavor. So maybe bash could look into using libpcre as well. But my personal problem with libpcre is that it

bash leaks sh-np-NNN files and pipes in /tmp/ when command substitution is used

2013-12-10 Thread Yuri
Some of my scripts use command substitution, and now I see that there are lots of files like these in /tmp: prw--- 1 yuri wheel 0 Dec 10 13:32 sh-np-1386738492 -rw-r--r-- 1 yuri wheel3278909 Dec 10 14:54 sh-np-1386721176 Besides the obvious question why they aren't delet