patches vs sed

Ben benhoskings at hotmail.com
Sun Sep 22 02:15:31 PDT 2002


I find a much better way to do LFS is to have GPM running in the console 
- first I read over the commands and understand what they're doing, then 
just copy and paste to the building prompt with the mouse. I realise 
that LFS shouldn't be simply mindless copying of commands, but
a) that can actually be a good way to learn at first - to just blindly 
paste and see everything working, and then start to understand how it 
all functions, and
b) if I understand it already, then there's no sense in wasting huge 
amounts of time copying all the commands in.

Again, just MHO :D


Greg Schafer wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Just an observation really.
> 
> Typing in sed expressions is fiddly and error prone. I used to hate the
> copious amount of seds that were in the book at one stage. It was like
> there was some sort of competition to see who could write the most
> complicated sed statement! I was so glad when the decision was made to
> replace most of the seds with patches.
> 
> Simple seds are fine.
> Complex seds should be replaced with patches.
> 
> What prompted me to write this was the latest man commands:-
> 
> sed -e '/^PAGER/s/-is/-isR/' \
>     -e 's%MANPATH[[:space:]]/usr/man%#MANPATH /usr/man%' \
>     src/man.conf.backup > src/man.conf &&
> 
> That is bordering on complex and could likely be replaced with a patch.
> 
> Just MHO of course.
> 
> Greg

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list