Hi, Taco I refer to the man pages of GNU sed :http://www.gnu.org/software/sed/manual/sed.html#Extended-regexps and it said, "The only difference between basic and extended regular expressions is in the behavior of a few characters: `?', `+', parentheses, and braces (`{}'). While basic regular expressions require these to be escaped if you want them to behave as special characters, when using extended regular expressions you must escape them if you want them to match a literal character." so I think it is safe to change your expression from sed -r 's/^([0-9]+).*/\1/'` into sed 's/^\([0-9]\+\).*/\1/'` Please have a test (I have no *nix system with me now) Yue Wang On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

Yue Wang wrote:

...

Hi, Taco.

A minor issue: in the file /src/texk/web2c/luatexdir/get_svnversion.sh, please avoid the -r option since it is not supported by many sed programs. see http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/utilities/sed.html for the POSIX standard. (GNU sed support the option, however, BSD style sed (like the one distributed in FreeBSD or Mac OS X think this is an illegal statement during compilation)

Does it work without -r, or does the regex need changing ?

Best wishes, Taco