[OT] Re: Problem with positional output

On my CentOS 7.2, sed --version shows “GNU/sed 4.2.2”, and sed --help does
not show -E, but nevertheless accepts -E.

[OT]
As I said previously, the manpage is inaccurate, and so is the --help
switch. Yes, one can argue about names, but it doesn’t change the fact -
call it Linux or GNU/Linux, or CentOS. Inaccurate manpages lead to buggy
application programs in my experience. The "gold standard" of manpages is
OpenBSD.
[/OT]

Thanks.

-ag

On 11/16/16, 3:50 PM, "[email protected] on behalf of Stephane
Chazelas [email protected] [sed-users]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>2016-11-16 23:17:11 +0000, Amarendra Godbole
>[email protected] [sed-users]:
>> Linux man pages are known to lag behind and/or incorrect. Doesn¹t
>>surprise
>> me, since most focus these days seems to add more and more code, who
>>cares
>> for the manpages anyways? ;-)
>[...]
>
>This has nothing to do with Linux. We're talking of GNU sed
>here. Linux has no sed command, it's just a kernel. There have
>been several sed commands ported to Linux. The most common (in
>terms of Linux-based system deployments in the wild) is probably
>busybox' (think of embedded systems).
>
>Busybox tools are usually shaped after their GNU equivalent
>(with reduced functionality). -r was added there in 2004, and -E
>in 2013 (and documented at the same time).
>
>GNU systems (with a Linux kernel like Debian GNU/Linux, Fedora
>or otherwise like Debian GNU/kFreeBSD) of course tend to ship
>with GNU sed.
>
>-- 
>Stephane
>
>
>------------------------------------
>Posted by: Stephane Chazelas <[email protected]>
>------------------------------------