DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 4A44vLGE1258004 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=QI3AqFJz X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E51383858C2B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1730696239; bh=wXCeoPno+/QDpHW50q7ByBYOvSp+dQTH5qod8DnQW18=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=QI3AqFJz8OVYuuWxwcc0dQuh7L2+LofFlVvK7lFkaHkMf/aq80rB1VQXXW/WvgFwV 8qowJrRS3DnUb8fIQ8nwm1cvHuFOavEu+9wFhnb3aLfB/nrALsBctt6T/Sd1UBqA73 5uWU2YgW8s/E5eyo410lkBQMGikWXZ1aLbecacJ8= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 982653858D29 ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 982653858D29 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1730696215; cv=none; b=obgxKNzaLlVp1f6lqMbpZ3e9ietXY0ZLU5ujmnRw4CIeZG7BP/xsCBMRDCUD0TgzIV4oPcaDePRsdN2WJRxc5YG6juot+T3kF/0OT+M5gPVZpICz44FnazvA740u9mDQZkSdGRrfncAusXQA3MxHsYdrGEMODGrVoyc2KcKEsp4= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1730696215; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SPxvPW1q8Rxkm/UQoETFidwPq9ig3RcFPtmWnrmqM10=; h=DKIM-Signature:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To; b=ua6cMInOQmXA62+9UdlAYbJFcOCvXJxsl8iYNJR0Yq9dMzYDuDd25aEHvzSYpVbxFfTDiD9IAKvd2VRVLSmxEsslRkklbLaY5v7UvUe64bMaPhWIytDe6xw8d/cHDI/iEpD4sANYU3plc2qPlafggcdsAMsFW/xBCNNSdt6EN0s= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730696212; x=1731301012; h=content-transfer-encoding:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=UfPeCGEO799iyBSoYr4DgH0ecjBKu2Jx0uBI8/ZdEWk=; b=iZnQEySiwJy+p8b9tmrQPTWFh+odQuE/Smpj83lC0nwdd/MeyZ5Uj5WoPauFr5r2++ ozGFuqRwGOzESX4Uxe/noYrQjFr0HU70DXpALdVs8vgnYr6OWLqEE6sA2D0MJnJz8g7s bjz2mpJPwIRbQHoLhdotrtEmJdND02hR466xO4md2aYhkwDXf6c1ps0BA/1Zsdo/+YIY Gh8PfbJFvG+tt/iGne1MjffGNtL6id1rZQ70gdGVc8cQ4xc6u5W9DcoN0l79inOjUpik FM0xxMk/XuO0QOKNbCkxIUCPY+My63zQxZ2NwG0ZEO3OmMuhnLSr26kWeCp6GcvFJjGI XC9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzezByYZORRgXB5cq4JwSGbNUr5c78jyXnVxoEuEDvZdj69PmNc ruF5mvoRvPQ67dgwSa/WMeBvYMzVblrtMk+GfiRkZ9UEOD5s4dl3kc045rqt31NgkyVi1ID6TDo y6/+ifGMq9GDPtVBCpyZllPQuWeleV1KdFbI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEsZiSEk35KvnF48nqYd9OLSD5Az4vFsfMuYPxSWGmhDc+r0J2kRvr4nRYTFw8vvrluuC5OmQ9OjAeroHY1yAg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:13cf:b0:5ce:bc80:9467 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cebc809578mr10374072a12.19.1730696211704; Sun, 03 Nov 2024 20:56:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6fdbf92d-51f2-47ae-a482-5edd89ed3a89 AT maxrnd DOT com> <7618ad16-fc5a-4c5c-bce2-25915c2f2cc8 AT maxrnd DOT com> In-Reply-To: <7618ad16-fc5a-4c5c-bce2-25915c2f2cc8@maxrnd.com> Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:56:38 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is this correct behaviour for 'rev'? To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Backwoods BC via Cygwin Reply-To: Backwoods BC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: "Cygwin" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 4A44vLGE1258004 On Sun, Nov 3, 2024 at 1:49 AM Mark Geisert via Cygwin wrote: > > Continuing my monologue, with due consideration of comments posted, ... > > On 10/23/2024 10:01 PM, Mark Geisert via Cygwin wrote: > > Replying to myself, I continue... > > > > On 10/22/2024 10:33 PM, Mark Geisert via Cygwin wrote: > >> On 10/22/2024 8:00 PM, Backwoods BC via Cygwin wrote: > >>> It appears that 'rev' is choking on any character \x80 or higher, but > >>> is OK with those \x1f or smaller. It doesn't give an error or ignore > >>> it, it just stops. > >>> > >>> I don't have access to a Linux box so I can't see if this happens > >>> there and nothing in the documentation suggests that this is the > >>> correct functionality. > >>> > >>> Test case: > >>> printf 'no non-ASCII characters\nhex 01 >\x01< here\nhex 80 >\x80< > >>> here\nLine 4\n'|rev|rev > >>> > >>> This is for "rev from util-linux 2.33.1" > >>> > >>> I don't have the current version of 'rev' on my system due to not > >>> having updated in a while. I accidentally screwed up my installation > >>> and have been reluctant to wipe it and start over. > >>> > >>> So, is this the expected behaviour for the current version of 'rev' > >>> under Cygwin and/or Linux? > >> > >> The current Cygwin util-linux 2.39.3-2 rev behaves in the same, broken > >> way. It looks like line-ending char(s) are not being handled > >> correctly. Don't know yet if it's rev itself or fgetws() being used > >> by rev that's busted. I'll investigate further. Thanks for the report! > > > > This is a locale issue. In the default Cygwin locale, rev mishandles > > the \x80 byte and instead of stopping with an error message it enters an > > infinite loop. I'll probably report this upstream instead of working > > out a local fix. > > Upstream util-linux 2.40.2 has an updated 'rev' that stops with an error > message when the OP's testcase is tried. I'm testing the full 2.40.2 > for Cygwin release before too long. > > > There is a work-around: change to the "C" locale just to run rev. > > LC_ALL=C rev zzz > > where zzz is a file containing your four lines. You can also run your > > original testcase with "rev" replaced by "LC_ALL=C rev" in both places. > > Implicit in that suggestion is that the OP seemed to be uninterested in > any form of multi-byte characters.. just straightforward operation on > bytes, even if they have the high bit set. > > That said, I appreciate the follow-up comments that dealt with the > general problem. > Thanks all, > > ..mark Sorry for dropping out of the thread. I lost interest in pursuing the issue once I learned that 'rev' would balk at any character it didn't like instead of just passing it through, and found a workaround for my case. What I really wanted is something that would do a byte-by-byte reversal working backwards from a LF character. My use for 'rev' is to allow sorting based on field position from the *end* of the line. 'sort' won't do this itself, as far as I can tell. My method follows: printf -v mySep '\xff' cat fileOfFullPathNames | rev | sed -r -e "s/\./$mySep/" | rev | sort -t "$mySep" --key=2.1 | tr "$mySep" '.' This particular pipe is to sort fileOfFullPathNames by file extension. As mentioned, this stops abruptly when it encounters my inserted field separator of \xff. I found that it would do what I wanted if I used \x1f as mySep instead. To be honest, in far too many years of using *nix as a user (not a developer), doing this kind of thing is the only use I've ever had for 'rev'. I probably used a different separator before (likely \x09) which is why I haven't encountered an issue. What I appear to really need is "rev --binary" that just reverses everything regardless of what it is until it finds a LF. I may get motivated to write it for myself if I run into situations where I can't work around the restrictions in 'rev'. -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple