From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 21:41:25 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC] t: allow use of "sed -E" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Junio C Hamano writes: > Since early 2019 with e62e225f (test-lint: only use only sed [-n] > [-e command] [-f command_file], 2019-01-20), we have been trying to > limit the options of "sed" we use in our tests to "-e ", > "-n", and "-f ". > > Before the commit, we were trying to reject only "-i" (which is one > of the really-not-portable options), but the commit explicitly > wanted to reject use of "-E" (use ERE instead of BRE). The commit > cites the then-current POSIX.1 (Issue 7, 2018 edition) to show that > "even recent POSIX does not have it!", but the latest edition (Issue > 8) documents "-E" as an option to use ERE. > > But that was 7 years ago, and that is a long time for many things to > happen. > > Besides, we have been using "sed -E" without the check in question > triggering in one of the scripts since 2022, with 461fec41 (bisect > run: keep some of the post-v2.30.0 output, 2022-11-10). It was > hidden because the 'E' was squished with another single letter > option. > > t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh: sed -En 's/.*(bisect... > > This escaped the rather simple pattern used in the checker > > /\bsed\s+-[^efn]\s+/ and err 'sed option not portable...'; > > because -E did not appear as a singleton. > > Let's change the rule to allow the "-E" option, which nobody has > complained against for the past 3 years. We rewrite our first use > of the "-E" option so that it is caught by the old rule, primarily > because we do not want to teach our mischievous developers how to > smuggle in an unwated option undetected by the test lint. And at "unwated" -> "unwanted", of course ;-) > the same time, loosen the pattern to allow "-E" the same way we > allow "-n" and friends. > > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano > --- > > t/check-non-portable-shell.pl | 2 +- > t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git c/t/check-non-portable-shell.pl w/t/check-non-portable-shell.pl > index 6ee7700eb4..dd8af6d08f 100755 > --- c/t/check-non-portable-shell.pl > +++ w/t/check-non-portable-shell.pl > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ sub err { > > $_ = $line; > /\bcp\s+-a/ and err 'cp -a is not portable'; > - /\bsed\s+-[^efn]\s+/ and err 'sed option not portable (use only -n, -e, -f)'; > + /\bsed\s+-[^Eefn]\s+/ and err 'sed option not portable (use only -n, -e, -f)'; > /\becho\s+-[neE]/ and err 'echo with option is not portable (use printf)'; > /^\s*declare\s+/ and err 'arrays/declare not portable'; > /^\s*[^#]\s*which\s/ and err 'which is not portable (use type)'; > diff --git c/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh w/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > index cdc0270640..1ba9ca219e 100755 > --- c/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > +++ w/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh > @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ test_expect_success 'git bisect run: negative exit code' " > git bisect good $HASH1 && > git bisect bad $HASH4 && > ! git bisect run ./fail.sh 2>err && > - sed -En 's/.*(bisect.*code) (-?[0-9]+) (from.*)/\1 -1 \3/p' err >actual && > + sed -E -n 's/.*(bisect.*code) (-?[0-9]+) (from.*)/\1 -1 \3/p' err >actual && > test_cmp expect actual > " >