Ah --- sorted! The 1 is being returned because an error is occurring further up the file, which is being hidden in amongst the other output. These lines:
g/:w/s/^\(...\).*/#define C_\1(w) CC_opcst(op_\1, w)\ #define C_\1_narg() CC_opnarg(op_\1)/ ...worked in 1.10, but not in 1.14; you can't replace with a literal newline like this any more and 1.14 is producing an 'invalid newline substitution' error. So the 1 status code was actually ed trying to be helpful and telling me that something was wrong. So I believe that's all WAI. On a related note --- any ideas how to adjust the script to work on modern eds? Line splitting inside a g is explicitly forbidden by both Posix and the GNU ed manual for reasons of ambiguity. On Tue, 22 May 2018 at 21:32 David Given <d...@cowlark.com> wrote: > It's worth mentioning that the ed these scripts were written for didn't > have the buffer-modified warning at all --- the scripts are full of > fragments like this: > > ed - $em_table <<'A' > X > 1,/^$/g/ /s// /gp > A > > (from > https://github.com/davidgiven/ack/blob/4d24666432a4a01a67ed9b993c912f44b4cfe0a8/modules/src/em_data/new_table, > written in 1985.) > > I believe this worked fine on 1.10. > > > On Tue, 22 May 2018 at 20:41 Ori Avtalion <o...@avtalion.name> wrote: > >> The non-zero exit status only appears with 1.14.2, and not with 1.13. >> Executing the H command reveals that the ? warning is "buffer modified". >> >> The relevant change is likely: >> >The modified status is no longer cleared after writing the buffer to the >> >standard input of a shell command. (Reported by Jérôme Frgacic). >> >> Reported at >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-ed/2016-08/msg00000.html >> >> When the Q command is issued on a modified buffer, I don't understand >> why ed exits with exit status 1 instead of 0. No error has occurred. >> >
_______________________________________________ bug-ed mailing list bug-ed@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-ed
