Re: busybox sed not POSIX-conforming? (was: groff 1.25.0.rc2 on Alpine Linux)

On Mon, 17 Aug 2026 at 08:23, Roberto A. Foglietta
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> To be specific
>
> - looking at the code (my current fork but on sed is almost aligned
> apart from an inline function), it does process both. The issue is
> ORDERING, not ignoring
>
> Therefore, to confirm the bug the best way is
>
> - 1. to have a reproducible test case in the busybox test suite
> - 2. determine which version was used that shows an issue
> - 3. about #2, consider that the build uses an older bb version
>
> In attachment a patch that unfortunately causes regressions which are
> not acceptable IMHO.
>
commit 825b8f85af52adfe14bc07eb3aaff5fcc50a7070 (HEAD -> uchaosys,
origin/uchaosys)
Author: Roberto A. Foglietta <[email protected]>
Date:   Mon Aug 17 08:57:33 2026 +0200

    sed.c: POSIX compliance fix about '-f' with '-e' ordered options v3

[...]

    v1 --> v2:
    - from string comparison to a more compact options check
    v2 --> v3:
    - what about -nre? or -nve? uncommon but lecit and broken, fixed

    requires:

    - sed.c: POSIX compliance fix about '-f' with '-e' ordered options v2

    todo:

    - test in testsuite
    - footprint reduction

    Signed-off-by: Roberto A. Foglietta <[email protected]>

-- 
Roberto A. Foglietta
+49.176.274.75.661
+39.349.33.30.697