Re: grep-2.5.1a bug report: broken egrep and fgrep



Hello,

On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 10:35:17PM +0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stepan Kasal wrote:
> >I fixed it now in the CVS. (Sorry, Julian, that I haven't submitted it
> >for review; I wanted to say that it had been already fixed...)
>
> That's OK. There is no need to submit a patch for review if you are
> confident that it is correct.

when I broke the rule, it wasn't that I'm so sure.
My main reason was that it is a bit more complicated to submit it to review
as it takes two steps (merge the two rules in the makefile, then change the
merged rule). So I decided to check it in as two commits, with the risk
that if any of you find a bug, we will have to check it in separately.

I perfectly agree with both Jim and Arnold. But what would be my life
without breaking a rule occasionally?

BTW, when I get to the big bang with configure.ac and autogen.sh, I will
probably do it directly in the CVS, and you will test it from there.

I see no reasonable way to mail this as a patch. (cvs diff doesn't
display removed files, right?) Or should I tar the whole tree and put it
somwhere for testing?

Comments welcome.

Regards,
Stepan





...



Privacy