On 2005-06-27 James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 10:55:38AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Previous versions of find used the Emacs syntax for regexps.
> ... but if I recall correctly the documentation said the syntax was
> POSIX BRE.
Actually it says
| by defa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Youngman) writes:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 10:55:38AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Previous versions of find used the Emacs syntax for regexps.
>
> ... but if I recall correctly the documentation said the syntax was
> POSIX BRE.
Where does it say that?
Andreas.
--
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 10:55:38AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Previous versions of find used the Emacs syntax for regexps.
... but if I recall correctly the documentation said the syntax was
POSIX BRE. So there is also the issue of which bit to fix.
James.
___
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 01:23:58AM +0200, Bas van Gompel wrote:
> Op Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:14:41 +0200 (MET DST) schreef ik
> in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> [Do without visit_found ... another patch.]
>
> I just noticed, when we don't have visit_found, we don't need do_count.
> Please use the following p
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 05:21:08PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> This offers the possibility to clean up -I, -L, and -n interaction,
> from "last one wins" to
> { echo mutually-exclusive options specified. exiting ; exit 1; }
> cu andreas
Of course this has the possibility of bre
