Hi again,
I would like to mention that the committed patch for the trivial bugs
that I reported is not even complete: there are still two problematic
instructions literally one line above the one that did get fixed
correctly (and I actually find this mildly amusing, especially
considering the last
On 12/12/17 15:02, kshe wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 12:44:03 +, Todd C. Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:57:58 +, kshe wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps the worst part of all this, though, is how the change of
>>> behaviour, which made sed fail hard where it previously handled input in
>>> a pe
> Following the same kind of reasoning, I think OpenBSD should also
> modify the `echo' command to fail if given an argument like `-E', as
> its behaviour in that case differs from system to system, hence the
> current implementation is likewise "just creating a trap for the
> user", and surely thi
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 12:44:03 +, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:57:58 +, kshe wrote:
>
> > Perhaps the worst part of all this, though, is how the change of
> > behaviour, which made sed fail hard where it previously handled input in
> > a perfectly defined and reasonable way,
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:57:58 +, kshe wrote:
> Perhaps the worst part of all this, though, is how the change of
> behaviour, which made sed fail hard where it previously handled input in
> a perfectly defined and reasonable way, was apparently approved because
> "implementations do vary in how
Hi,
While attempting to fix one bug, the recent commit to sed regarding the
`y' command has introduced three new problems.
The first one is that it happily uses a plain `char' as the index for
the array `check', which obviously leads to havoc as soon as one tries
to translate non-ASCII characters
