Newlines in BSD sed vs gsed
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
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
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
add a comment |
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
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
add a comment |
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
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
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
sed gnu newlines bsd
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
edited Mar 30 at 17:18
Jeff Schaller♦
44.7k1163145
44.7k1163145
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
asked Mar 30 at 17:02
wolf-revo-catswolf-revo-cats
885935
885935
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
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
Ncommand 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.
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
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$!Ninstead ofNwhen-nis 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 wrtndisplayed byl. 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
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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
Ncommand 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.
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
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$!Ninstead ofNwhen-nis 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 wrtndisplayed byl. 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
add a comment |
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
Ncommand 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.
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
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$!Ninstead ofNwhen-nis 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 wrtndisplayed byl. 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
add a comment |
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
Ncommand 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.
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
140k17261435
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
Ncommand 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.
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
140k17261435
edited Mar 30 at 17:43
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
140k17261435
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
140k17261435
answered Mar 30 at 17:15
Kusalananda♦Kusalananda
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$!Ninstead ofNwhen-nis 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 wrtndisplayed byl. 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
add a comment |
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$!Ninstead ofNwhen-nis 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 wrtndisplayed byl. 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
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
