devfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Regex question - maybe devfsd should use REG_EXTENDED

To: Russell Coker <russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Regex question - maybe devfsd should use REG_EXTENDED
From: Greg Ward <gward@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 12:02:28 -0400
Cc: devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20011014233903.B405732889F@lyta.coker.com.au>
References: <20011013185814.A1334@cthulhu.mems-exchange.org> <20011014124259.01F0834CF7@lyta.coker.com.au> <20011014153424.C954@cthulhu.mems-exchange.org> <20011014233903.B405732889F@lyta.coker.com.au>
Sender: owner-devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22i
On 15 October 2001, Russell Coker said:
> > Is this true or not?  As near as I can tell, the real rule is: any
> > regular expression with parentheses in it fails.
> 
> I don't know.  We'll have to wait for clarification from Richard I think.

OK.  Still not clear to me whether the problem is the code, the docs, or
my brain.  I guess I could always look at the code... ;-)

> Right.  Maybe I should just recompile it with EXTENDED...

I'd vote for that!  I know nothing about Debian policy, but I personally
don't have a problem with enabling features on Debian builds that aren't
necessarily enabled in other distributions, even if it means I can't
take my config files from a Debian box to (say) a Red Hat box.

        Greg
-- 
Greg Ward - Unix geek                                   gward@xxxxxxxxxx
http://starship.python.net/~gward/
This message transmitted with 100% recycled electrons.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>