Maurice Lombardi wrote:

Maurice Lombardi a écrit :

...

Frank Heckenbach a écrit :

...

Maurice Lombardi wrote:

...

! ADD_RTS_PARENT_DIR = sed -e 's,-B([^/]),-B../../\1,g;s,^([^/][^ ]*),../../\1,'` ! ADD_RTS_PARENT_DIR = sed -e 's,-B([^/][^:]),-B../../\1,g;s,^([^/][^:][^ ]*),../../\1,'`

...

I need a great supply of asprin nearby when trying to decipher those sed scripts

Got the asprin. The logics is (extracted from rx.info)

For example, the character `*' is used to indicate that the preceeding element of a regexp may be repeated 0, 1, or more times.

0 is the problem. It does not excludes the case where : is the second character.

You're right, I overlooked the `*'. But I still don't see what the `[^ ]*' was for -- after all, it's inserted back in the same place, so it's irrelevant whether the parentheses match a few spaces more or less. So let's try it simply without the `*':

ADD_RTS_PARENT_DIR = sed -e 's,-B([^/][^:]),-B../../\1,g;s,^([^/][^:]),../../\1,'

And IIRC the + which would mean at least 1 is not understood by all sed's (notably the djgpp one whe had sometimes ago when I tried to figure that out.

Sun's sed doesn't understand it, either. But since `x+' is equivalent to `xx*', that's easy to work around. Not so with `|' :-(but that's OT here)...

May be a more recent release ...)

A recent GNU sed on DJGPP should understand it (the regex syntax is not system dependent, after all)...

However, note that `+' is extended regex syntax. In a basic regex (which is what sed expects), it's `+'.

Frank