Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
It does look like a correct change, but what I am worried from glibc
standpoint is if it would require a compatibility implementation
(potentially mapping RE_SYNTAX_{E}GREP to old definition on compat symbol).
I doubt whether that would be needed (or, as Zack writes, h
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Adhemerval Zanella
wrote:
> The glibc testfile, bug-regex28.c, is related to BZ#3957 [1], which is not
> strictly related to RE_SYNTAX_{E}GREP definition. On gnulib side the change
> was done somewhat recently (2015) by 5a5a9388e.
>
> It does look like a correct c
Hi Paul,
Working on syncing gnulib regex files with glibc a change on gnulib
triggers a regression on a glibc testcase:
posix/bug-regex28.c:
24 struct tests
25 {
26 const char *regex;
27 const char *string;
28 reg_syntax_t syntax;
29 int retval;
30 } tests[] = {
31 #define EGREP
