patchtest-bzr: Do not use unportable sed "\+"

> Using sed -e '/[0-9]\+//' to find "one ore more" digits
> is not portable.
> Use the Basic Regular Expression '/[0-9][0-9]*//' instead
>
> Signed-off-by: Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>

> ---
>  contrib/remote-helpers/test-bzr.sh | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/contrib/remote-helpers/test-bzr.sh b/contrib/remote-helpers/test-bzr.sh
> index d9c32f4..5dfa070 100755
> --- a/contrib/remote-helpers/test-bzr.sh
> +++ b/contrib/remote-helpers/test-bzr.sh
> @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ test_expect_success 'strip' '
>  
>    echo four >> content &&
>    bzr commit -m four &&
> -  bzr log --line | sed -e "s/^[0-9]\+: //" > ../expected
> +  bzr log --line | sed -e "s/^[0-9][0-9]*: //" > ../expected
>    ) &&
>  
>    (cd gitrepo &&

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> 
>> Thanks.  Is there another one in t/t5551-http-fetch.sh that checks
>> the tags?
> 
> I think your sed will see the same breakage for the one in 5551 (my
> sed is unfortunately GNU and ".\+" does not break it).  Could you
> test this patch with:
> 
>      GIT_TEST_LONG=YesPlease GIT_TEST_HTTPD=YesPlease \
>      ./t5551-http-fetch.sh
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>  t/t5551-http-fetch.sh | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/t/t5551-http-fetch.sh b/t/t5551-http-fetch.sh
> index b23efbb..4a3184e 100755
> --- a/t/t5551-http-fetch.sh
> +++ b/t/t5551-http-fetch.sh
> @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ test_expect_success EXPENSIVE 'create 50,000 tags in the repo' '
>  
>  	# now assign tags to all the dangling commits we created above
>  	tag=$("$PERL_PATH" -e "print \"bla\" x 30") &&
> -	sed -e "s/^:\(.\+\) \(.\+\)$/\2 refs\/tags\/$tag-\1/" <marks >>packed-refs
> +	sed -e "s|^:\([^ ]*\) \(.*\)$|\2 refs/tags/$tag-\1|" <marks >>packed-refs
>  	)

> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:
> 
>> I did,
>> the interesting thing is that the test passes with and without your patch.
>> (After enabling  GIT_TEST_LONG and GIT_TEST_HTTPD in both cases)
> 
> Strange.  Do you see differences between the produced packed-refs
> file?

> On 11.05.13 22:09, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:
>> 
>>> I did,
>>> the interesting thing is that the test passes with and without your patch.
>>> (After enabling  GIT_TEST_LONG and GIT_TEST_HTTPD in both cases)
>> 
>> Strange.  Do you see differences between the produced packed-refs
>> file?
>
> The original version seems to look like this:
> :1 666527db455708922859283c673094002092910b
> :2 1e2acf73c6db881cfb1d56d67662e3d9260be2cf
> [snip]
>
> The "fixed POSIX version" follows that style:
> 666527db455708922859283c673094002092910b refs/tags/blablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablabla-1
> 1e2acf73c6db881cfb1d56d67662e3d9260be2cf refs/tags/blablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablabla-2
> [snip]

> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> ---
>  t/t5551-http-fetch.sh | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

> On 2013-05-13 00.50, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
>> ---
>>  t/t5551-http-fetch.sh | 8 ++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
> Thanks, works like a charm, tested on Mac OS.
> /torsten

> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:
> 
>> On 2013-05-13 00.50, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
>>> ---
>>>  t/t5551-http-fetch.sh | 8 ++++++--
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>> Thanks, works like a charm, tested on Mac OS.
>> /torsten
> 
> Thanks; I take it that you reverted the "sed fix" part and saw the
> updated "clone" check fail with the platform "sed"?

> On 2013-05-13 18.30, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:
>> 
>>> On 2013-05-13 00.50, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  t/t5551-http-fetch.sh | 8 ++++++--
>>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>> Thanks, works like a charm, tested on Mac OS.
>>> /torsten
>> 
>> Thanks; I take it that you reverted the "sed fix" part and saw the
>> updated "clone" check fail with the platform "sed"?
> In my first test with the fix the test case passed.
> Then the sed expression was only manipulated to verify that the TC failes.
> And now I took even the original expression and have verfied it is failing.
>
> The short version: Yes