[lfs-dev] Possible problem with grep-2.23

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Mon Feb 15 14:16:31 PST 2016


On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 04:56:18PM -0500, Chris Staub wrote:
> On 02/15/2016 04:32 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> >
> >What seems to be happening is that grep-2.23 used with -v discards
> >too much, grep-2.22 was ok.
> >
> >My commands have evolved, the listing comes down to the following,
> >reformatted to one part per line with numbers added at end
> >
> >find -H / -xdev -type f -o -type l | \	# 001
> >sed 's%^/mnt/lfs%%' | \			# 002
> >grep -v '^/logs' | \			# 003
> >grep -v '^/misc' | \			# 004
> >grep -v '^/building' | \		# 005
> >grep -v '^/tmp' |  \			# 006
> >sed 's/\x20/\\\ /g' | \			# 007
> >xargs ls -l | \				# 008
> >sed 's%\([^/]*\)\(.*\)%\2 \1%'		# 009
> >
> >All is fine in the first two steps, but removing any line which
> >starts '/logs' does far more.
> >
> >root in chroot /# wc -l /tmp/list002 /tmp/list003
> >   37121 /tmp/list002
> >    1495 /tmp/list003
> >
> >and the diff starts:
> >
> >--- /tmp/list002        2016-02-15 20:38:16.966065542 +0000
> >+++ /tmp/list003        2016-02-15 20:38:39.717790746 +0000
> >@@ -1492,35630 +1492,4 @@
> >  /usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/iso8859-4.txt
> >  /usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/utf/utflist
> >  /usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/utf/ethiopic
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/utf/<E2><99><AA><E2><99><AC>
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/utf/utfdemo
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/utf/README
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/kbd.FAQ-21.html
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/iso8859-6.txt
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/kbd.FAQ-9.html
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/kbd.FAQ-1.html
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/kbd.FAQ-17.html
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/kbd.FAQ-13.html
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/kbd.FAQ-16.html
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/iso8859-14.txt
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/iso8859-1.txt
> >-/usr/share/doc/kbd-2.0.3/iso8859-10.txt
> >
> >and finally gets to
> >-/bin/cat
> >-/bin/cp
> >-/bin/bzcat
> >-/bin/lsattr
> >+Binary file (standard input) matches
> >
> >Can anybody confirm this sort of problem with grep-2.23 ?  Or am I
> >misusing those grep -v commands ?
> >
> >FWIW, the final sed rearranges the fields so that the filename comes
> >first - that aids the comparison.
> >
> Do you get similar results with slightly different grep commands - for
> example, does it do the same if you leave out the "^" and just do "grep -v
> '/logs'"?

Yes.  Identical.

ĸen
-- 
This email was written using 100% recycled letters.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list