[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-( |
Date: |
Mon, 25 May 2015 08:18:56 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 |
Linda Walsh wrote:
I had one file that it bailed on
saying it has an invalid UTF-8 encoding -- but the line was
recursive starting from '.' -- and it didn't name the file
That's pretty vague. Can you reproduce that problem? I don't observe it:
$ mkdir d
$ printf 'a\200\n' >d/f
$ printf 'b\200\n' >d/g
$ grep -r a d
Binary file d/f matches
"-a" doesn't work, BTW:
Ishtar:/tmp> grep -a '\000\000' zeros
Ishtar:/tmp> echo $?
1
That's the way 'grep' has always behaved. The regular expression '\0' matches
the string "0", not the NUL byte.
Ishtar:/tmp> grep -P '\000\000' zeros Binary file zeros matches
I don't follow this example; perhaps some text was omitted? Anyway, -P has
always treated files containing zeros as binary files too, ever since -P has
been introduced. It's the same as without -P.
But there it is -- if grep wasn't meant to handle binary files,
it wouldn't know to call 'zeroes' a binary file.
Obviously, grep *is* meant to handle binary files; it's documented to handle
them in a particular way.
how can 'shuf' claim to work on input lines yet have this allowed:
-z, --zero-terminated
line delimiter is NUL, not newline.
I don't follow this point. -z is a nice feature; we don't want to get rid of
it.
People argue to dumb down POSIX
utils, because some corp wants to get a posix label but
has a few shortcomings -- so they donate enough money and
posix changes it's rules.
I'm afraid you've gone off the deep end here.
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, L. A. Walsh, 2015/05/24
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Eric Blake, 2015/05/24
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Linda Walsh, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(,
Paul Eggert <=
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Linda Walsh, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Paul Eggert, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Linda Walsh, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Paul Eggert, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Linda Walsh, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Paul Eggert, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Linda Walsh, 2015/05/25
- bug#20638: BUG: standard & extended RE's don't find NUL's :-(, Linda Walsh, 2015/05/25