Re: [PATCH 0/5] some shell portability fixes

"Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy" [off-list ref] writes:

On 11/7/07, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 11/7/07, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

[2/5] Gaah, AIX sed X-<.  I am not opposed to this patch but
      would want to get Yays from people with non GNU sed.  Is
      busybox sed good enough to grok our scripts these days?
      Please ask help and collect Acks at least from folks on
      Solaris, MacOS, FBSD, and OBSD.

I haven't extensively used all the scripts. There seems to be no
sed-related failure from git testsuite results in my git-box branch.
So I would say for now it's good enough.

Argh, should have made it clear, busybox sed is good enough.

Thanks.  And you can also happy grok Ralf's rewritten construct,
right?

That is, existing

        $ sed -e 's/foo/\n/' file

will be rewritten by the patch [2/5] to

        $ sed -e 's/foo/\
        /' file