[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: sed
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: sed |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:30:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Hello Stephane, all,
* Stephane Chazelas wrote on Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:07:36AM CET:
>
> 1- "echo" is a command to expand the \b, \n, \r... not the
> command to display some text verbatim
Not necessarily.
> echo '\v'
>
> outputs a vertical tab followed by a line feed.
Not my shell's echo, no. That outputs backslash v newline. Not being
able to rely on this is exactly one reason to avoid echo.
> You want the POSIX printf '%s\n' or the ksh/zsh specific print
> -r --.
Yep. However in the real world (that one that exists next to
standards), existing printf programs can have bugs with long
arguments, or with \045. If present, printf is certainly
preferable to echo, though.
Cheers,
Ralf
- sed, Conner, Neil, 2007/02/12
- Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/13
- Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/13
- Re: sed, Matthew Woehlke, 2007/02/13
- Message not available
- Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/13
- Re: sed, Matthew Woehlke, 2007/02/13
- Message not available
- Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/14
- Re: sed, Matthew Woehlke, 2007/02/14
- Message not available
- Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/15
Re: sed,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- RE: sed, Conner, Neil, 2007/02/13
- Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/14
Re: sed, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/02/14
Re: sed, Ralf Wildenhues, 2007/02/14