[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: sed -i symlink behavior...

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Peter Bloomfield <peterbloomfield bellsouth net> wrote:
On 09/02/2009 10:07 AM, Warren Togami wrote:

On 09/02/2009 11:39 AM, Jerry James wrote:

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Warren Togami<wtogami redhat com>  wrote:

What is the correct behavior?  Is this a bug that it changed?

Read up on the --follow-symlinks option to sed.

This is a new option it seems, meaning I can't rely on sed -i at all anymore. I'm rather displeased that a core utility fundamentally changed its own behavior.


Apparently [1] upstream sed always broke symlinks, and "Red Hat made a patch" to follow them instead.  Fedora packages from some point up to sed-4.1.5-12.fc11 seem to have used it.  So the default behavior in Fedora sed is now consistent with upstream, instead of with the prior patched version.  That's inconvenient if you're accustomed to the "Red Hat" version, but better for interoperability!


[1] http://www.nabble.com/Re:-sed:-Patch-to-follow-symlinks-and--c-option-td7471749.html

In fact the comment in this link is
I want sed -i and perl -i to behave as similarly as possible.  Hence,
the patch is rejected as is.  --copy is rejected for the same reason.
as i have already commented out previously.


fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list redhat com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]