* On Saturday 2005-07-16 at 14:43:10 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> Charles Levert wrote:
> >I think the only pending patch that's affected
> >is one you were working on to fix a bug.
>
> Sorry to be so forgetful, but could you post the URL or tracker number of
> the particular bug that you are talk
Please see the revised bug-fix patch, attached.
Charles Levert wrote:
Given that, it's pointless and even ambiguous
(if LC_ALL isn't already exported) to use
LC_ALL=... function-call ...
LC_ALL=... function-call ...
instead of
LC_ALL=...; export LC_ALL
function-call ...
functi
Charles Levert wrote:
The following patch should be equivalent and
much more readable.
+b17='b'
+b85="$b17$b17$b17$b17$b17"
+b255="$b85$b85$b85"
+x16=''
+x64="$x16$x16$x16$x16"
+x256="$x64$x64$x64$x64"
+bm="cbbba${b255}c"
+grep_test "a${b255}a" "" "a${b255}b"
+g
* On Tuesday 2005-06-14 at 22:19:26 -0400, Charles Levert wrote:
> * On Wednesday 2005-06-15 at 01:45:10 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>
> I noticed there's a problem with LC_ALL still
> being set to $u from above, which it shouldn't
> be. I'll have to investigate that separately.
It turns out that,
* On Wednesday 2005-06-15 at 01:45:10 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>
> diff -u -3 -p -d -r1.8 foad1.sh
The following patch should be equivalent and
much more readable.
I haven't looked at the rest yet, so I can't
vouch for the validity of the tests themselves,
regardless of how they're scripted.
I
