On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Peter Bloomfield <
peterbloomfi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On 09/02/2009 10:07 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
>
>>
>> On 09/02/2009 11:39 AM, Jerry James wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
>>>
What is the correct behavior? I
On 09/02/2009 10:07 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
On 09/02/2009 11:39 AM, Jerry James wrote:
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Warren Togami
wrote:
What is the correct behavior? Is this a bug that it changed?
Read up on the --follow-symlinks option to sed.
This is a new option it seems, mea
On 09/02/2009 11:39 AM, Jerry James wrote:
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
What is the correct behavior? Is this a bug that it changed?
Read up on the --follow-symlinks option to sed.
This is a new option it seems, meaning I can't rely on sed -i at all
anymore. I'm r
Could be related to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470912
(at least that would explain the difference between RHEL5 and F10 -- I
don't have any explanation for the diff between F10 and F11/12).
Anyway F10 is the right behavior from my point of view...
--
Regards,
Milos
Dne 2.9
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
> I just noticed some behavior changes within sed. Run the following
> commands in various distros.
>
> #!/bin/bash
> set -x
> echo "abc" > original.txt
> ln -s original.txt symlink.txt
> sed -i 's/abc/123/' symlink.txt
> if [ -L symlink.txt ]
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
> What is the correct behavior? Is this a bug that it changed?
Read up on the --follow-symlinks option to sed.
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mail
I just noticed some behavior changes within sed. Run the following
commands in various distros.
#!/bin/bash
set -x
echo "abc" > original.txt
ln -s original.txt symlink.txt
sed -i 's/abc/123/' symlink.txt
if [ -L symlink.txt ]; then
echo yes symlink
else
echo not symlink anymore
fi
cat o
