On 12/5/19 2:29 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
tag 38503 notabug
thanks
On 12/5/19 12:30 PM, jan h wrote:
grep 3.3
Note that the Rational Range Interpretation of ranges claims that [0-9]
should have the expansion [012345689] in ALL locales; and more and more
versions of GNU utilities are starting to move to RRI (even newer glibc
is trying to move towards RRI for more regex operations). If this
example is run where RRI is in force, then it should not match non-ASCII
Unicode digits. But you didn't mention which version of grep you are
using, let alone which version of libc is providing your locale
definitions, to make that determination; and POSIX does not require RRI.
Sorry, I missed that you did mention grep 3.3. And the NEWS for grep
does not mention 'RRI' or 'Rational Range Interpretation' (compare that
to bash 4.2 introducing globasciiranges, or gawk introducing RRI in
4.0.1). So I'm not sure of the current state of whether grep tries to
use RRI on all systems or only on systems where it relies on gnulib's
regcomp instead of libc. So we may still need to reopen this if we
decide grep needs more RRI fixes.
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org