First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 123542
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: DUPLICATE of bug 122754
Assigned To: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Triffid Hunter <triffid_hunter@funkmunch.net>
Add CC:
CC:
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 123542 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 123542 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug

Description:   Opened: 2006-02-20 14:12 0000 
how do I put pcre support back into grep? I have one machine with this horrid
pcre-less grep and heaps of my admin scripts are broken. It has the _exact
same_ version (2.5.1-r9) as my two servers which both still have a working grep
-P, although until I realised that -P was gone, it had 2.5.1a on it.

pcregrep behaves differently to grep, and causes problems, eg; with its
different buffering and harder to type name.

can't we just put in an error stating that pcre+static=breakage, and put pcre
support back in?

------- Comment #1 From Jakub Moc (RETIRED) 2006-02-20 14:15:02 0000 ------- 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 102771 ***

------- Comment #2 From Triffid Hunter 2006-02-20 14:27:45 0000 ------- 
This is NOT a dupe of bug 102771. I read it *very carefully* before submitting
this one.

That bug is "pcre + static = breakage"
This bug is "someone took pcre away because of 102771, I don't care about
static, and I want pcre back"

They're neither equivalent nor mutually exclusive.

solution? put pcre back in, with a check in the ebuild that errors if someone
tries pcre+static, until such time as it works with both.

------- Comment #3 From Jakub Moc (RETIRED) 2006-02-20 14:32:16 0000 ------- 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 122754 ***
First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug