Newlines in BSD sed vs gsed

Multi tool use
Multi tool use





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







7















The sed, which comes with FreeBSD 11.2 p7, gives:



 $ seq 10 | sed 'N; l; D; p'
1$
2$
2$
3$
3$
4$
4$
5$
5$
6$
6$
7$
7$
8$
8$
9$
9$
10$


While gsed (GNU sed 4.7) gives for the same script:



$ seq 10 | gsed 'N; l; D; p'
1n2$
2n3$
3n4$
4n5$
5n6$
6n7$
7n8$
8n9$
9n10$
10


How can we explain this difference in behavior?










share|improve this question































    7















    The sed, which comes with FreeBSD 11.2 p7, gives:



     $ seq 10 | sed 'N; l; D; p'
    1$
    2$
    2$
    3$
    3$
    4$
    4$
    5$
    5$
    6$
    6$
    7$
    7$
    8$
    8$
    9$
    9$
    10$


    While gsed (GNU sed 4.7) gives for the same script:



    $ seq 10 | gsed 'N; l; D; p'
    1n2$
    2n3$
    3n4$
    4n5$
    5n6$
    6n7$
    7n8$
    8n9$
    9n10$
    10


    How can we explain this difference in behavior?










    share|improve this question



























      7












      7








      7








      The sed, which comes with FreeBSD 11.2 p7, gives:



       $ seq 10 | sed 'N; l; D; p'
      1$
      2$
      2$
      3$
      3$
      4$
      4$
      5$
      5$
      6$
      6$
      7$
      7$
      8$
      8$
      9$
      9$
      10$


      While gsed (GNU sed 4.7) gives for the same script:



      $ seq 10 | gsed 'N; l; D; p'
      1n2$
      2n3$
      3n4$
      4n5$
      5n6$
      6n7$
      7n8$
      8n9$
      9n10$
      10


      How can we explain this difference in behavior?










      share|improve this question
















      The sed, which comes with FreeBSD 11.2 p7, gives:



       $ seq 10 | sed 'N; l; D; p'
      1$
      2$
      2$
      3$
      3$
      4$
      4$
      5$
      5$
      6$
      6$
      7$
      7$
      8$
      8$
      9$
      9$
      10$


      While gsed (GNU sed 4.7) gives for the same script:



      $ seq 10 | gsed 'N; l; D; p'
      1n2$
      2n3$
      3n4$
      4n5$
      5n6$
      6n7$
      7n8$
      8n9$
      9n10$
      10


      How can we explain this difference in behavior?







      sed gnu newlines bsd






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Mar 30 at 17:18









      Jeff Schaller

      44.7k1163145




      44.7k1163145










      asked Mar 30 at 17:02









      wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats

      885935




      885935






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          8














          BSD sed, when using l to output characters in a visually unambiguous form, does not output newlines in a visually unambiguous form.



          From sed(1) on OpenBSD:



           [2addr]l
          (The letter ell.) Write the pattern space to the standard output
          in a visually unambiguous form. This form is as follows:

          backslash \
          alert a
          backspace b
          form-feed f
          carriage-return r
          tab t
          vertical tab v


          (note lack of mentioning of newlines).



          GNU sed, however, includes newlines in the set of characters to display unambiguously. It does this as an extension to the set of characters that the POSIX standard for sed mentions (which is the set that BSD sed uses). GNU sed behaves this way even if --posix is used on the command line.



          GNU sed also outputs 10 twice, while BSD sed does not. Running GNU sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT set or with --posix will make it output 10 only once, like BSD sed does.



          This is because GNU sed by default ignores the part of POSIX definition of the sed N command that says




          If no next line of input is available, the N command verb shall branch to the end of the script and quit without starting a new cycle or copying the pattern space to standard output.




          Note also that the p in your sed program never executes, as D starts a new cycle.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 2





            Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:29













          • @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

            – Kusalananda
            Mar 30 at 17:31











          • Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:34














          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f509606%2fnewlines-in-bsd-sed-vs-gsed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          8














          BSD sed, when using l to output characters in a visually unambiguous form, does not output newlines in a visually unambiguous form.



          From sed(1) on OpenBSD:



           [2addr]l
          (The letter ell.) Write the pattern space to the standard output
          in a visually unambiguous form. This form is as follows:

          backslash \
          alert a
          backspace b
          form-feed f
          carriage-return r
          tab t
          vertical tab v


          (note lack of mentioning of newlines).



          GNU sed, however, includes newlines in the set of characters to display unambiguously. It does this as an extension to the set of characters that the POSIX standard for sed mentions (which is the set that BSD sed uses). GNU sed behaves this way even if --posix is used on the command line.



          GNU sed also outputs 10 twice, while BSD sed does not. Running GNU sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT set or with --posix will make it output 10 only once, like BSD sed does.



          This is because GNU sed by default ignores the part of POSIX definition of the sed N command that says




          If no next line of input is available, the N command verb shall branch to the end of the script and quit without starting a new cycle or copying the pattern space to standard output.




          Note also that the p in your sed program never executes, as D starts a new cycle.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 2





            Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:29













          • @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

            – Kusalananda
            Mar 30 at 17:31











          • Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:34


















          8














          BSD sed, when using l to output characters in a visually unambiguous form, does not output newlines in a visually unambiguous form.



          From sed(1) on OpenBSD:



           [2addr]l
          (The letter ell.) Write the pattern space to the standard output
          in a visually unambiguous form. This form is as follows:

          backslash \
          alert a
          backspace b
          form-feed f
          carriage-return r
          tab t
          vertical tab v


          (note lack of mentioning of newlines).



          GNU sed, however, includes newlines in the set of characters to display unambiguously. It does this as an extension to the set of characters that the POSIX standard for sed mentions (which is the set that BSD sed uses). GNU sed behaves this way even if --posix is used on the command line.



          GNU sed also outputs 10 twice, while BSD sed does not. Running GNU sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT set or with --posix will make it output 10 only once, like BSD sed does.



          This is because GNU sed by default ignores the part of POSIX definition of the sed N command that says




          If no next line of input is available, the N command verb shall branch to the end of the script and quit without starting a new cycle or copying the pattern space to standard output.




          Note also that the p in your sed program never executes, as D starts a new cycle.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 2





            Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:29













          • @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

            – Kusalananda
            Mar 30 at 17:31











          • Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:34
















          8












          8








          8







          BSD sed, when using l to output characters in a visually unambiguous form, does not output newlines in a visually unambiguous form.



          From sed(1) on OpenBSD:



           [2addr]l
          (The letter ell.) Write the pattern space to the standard output
          in a visually unambiguous form. This form is as follows:

          backslash \
          alert a
          backspace b
          form-feed f
          carriage-return r
          tab t
          vertical tab v


          (note lack of mentioning of newlines).



          GNU sed, however, includes newlines in the set of characters to display unambiguously. It does this as an extension to the set of characters that the POSIX standard for sed mentions (which is the set that BSD sed uses). GNU sed behaves this way even if --posix is used on the command line.



          GNU sed also outputs 10 twice, while BSD sed does not. Running GNU sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT set or with --posix will make it output 10 only once, like BSD sed does.



          This is because GNU sed by default ignores the part of POSIX definition of the sed N command that says




          If no next line of input is available, the N command verb shall branch to the end of the script and quit without starting a new cycle or copying the pattern space to standard output.




          Note also that the p in your sed program never executes, as D starts a new cycle.






          share|improve this answer















          BSD sed, when using l to output characters in a visually unambiguous form, does not output newlines in a visually unambiguous form.



          From sed(1) on OpenBSD:



           [2addr]l
          (The letter ell.) Write the pattern space to the standard output
          in a visually unambiguous form. This form is as follows:

          backslash \
          alert a
          backspace b
          form-feed f
          carriage-return r
          tab t
          vertical tab v


          (note lack of mentioning of newlines).



          GNU sed, however, includes newlines in the set of characters to display unambiguously. It does this as an extension to the set of characters that the POSIX standard for sed mentions (which is the set that BSD sed uses). GNU sed behaves this way even if --posix is used on the command line.



          GNU sed also outputs 10 twice, while BSD sed does not. Running GNU sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT set or with --posix will make it output 10 only once, like BSD sed does.



          This is because GNU sed by default ignores the part of POSIX definition of the sed N command that says




          If no next line of input is available, the N command verb shall branch to the end of the script and quit without starting a new cycle or copying the pattern space to standard output.




          Note also that the p in your sed program never executes, as D starts a new cycle.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Mar 30 at 17:43

























          answered Mar 30 at 17:15









          KusalanandaKusalananda

          140k17261435




          140k17261435








          • 2





            Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:29













          • @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

            – Kusalananda
            Mar 30 at 17:31











          • Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:34
















          • 2





            Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:29













          • @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

            – Kusalananda
            Mar 30 at 17:31











          • Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Mar 30 at 17:34










          2




          2





          Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Mar 30 at 17:29







          Another difference is 10 being displayed once with BSD sed, and this time GNU sed behaves like BSD sed with POSIXLY_CORRECT. That's why you generally want to use $!N instead of N when -n is not enabled.

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Mar 30 at 17:29















          @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

          – Kusalananda
          Mar 30 at 17:31





          @StéphaneChazelas Thanks. I did not notice that difference at first.

          – Kusalananda
          Mar 30 at 17:31













          Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Mar 30 at 17:34







          Note that ast-open's sed behaves like GNU sed wrt n displayed by l. I suspect the POSIX requirement is an oversight here (they say it's not applicable which doesn't make sense here, I suspect they say that because the pattern space normally doesn't contain newline by default but overlook the fact that it can be added by N, G, s...; if they wanted to require the original sed behaviour, they would have said something like newline shall be output literally or something like that)

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Mar 30 at 17:34




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f509606%2fnewlines-in-bsd-sed-vs-gsed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          iIBDSBFuVUQKii dOYjV Zf5xmrVb,Df,azG8bH04n4 asx,hV4774l qFQHxoyZyIHSlAJJ
          DhA7ad94NIWdPAXwcDbQaKSyK,ZyOszyigoFZDneK,QGZ3BThLR2qy,kUJKiGp9UyEy NzGgd8LZDFu715aApEOsFcAR0vR9Fktl8

          Popular posts from this blog

          Bruad Bilen | Luke uk diar | NawigatsjuunCommonskategorii: BruadCommonskategorii: RunstükenWikiquote: Bruad

          Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

          Chléb Obsah Etymologie | Pojmy při krájení bochníku nebo pecnu chleba | Receptura a druhy | Typy českého chleba | Kvalita chleba v České republice | Cena chleba | Konzumace | Postup výroby | Odkazy | Navigační menuDostupné onlineKdo si mastí kapsu na chlebu? Pekaři to nejsouVývoj spotřebitelských cen – Český statistický úřadDostupné onlineJak se co dělá: Chleba4008364-08669