Hi,

This works great in vim, :v,^New,d
to delete all lines that do not begin with "New"

Please tell me the sed equiv so I can put it
into my #!/bin/sh script that I call from the
command line with sed -f

Thanks,

Vic

me at wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> This works great in vim, :v,^New,d
> to delete all lines that do not begin with "New"
> 
> Please tell me the sed equiv so I can put it
> into my #!/bin/sh script that I call from the
> command line with sed -f

/^New/!d

sed '/^New/!d'

me at wrote:

> Two different systems same result.  What am I doing
> wrong?
> 
> 159 % uname -a
> Linux XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2.4.37.5 #1 SMP Mon Aug 17 10:15:36 PDT 2009 i686
> unknown 160 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
> d: Event not found.
> 161 %
> 
> 
> 40 % uname -a
> Linux XXXXXXXXXXXX 2.6.18-128.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Mon Jun 1 15:52:58 EDT 2009
> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux 41 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
> d: Event not found.
> 42 %

You are using a C shell, which doesn't like bangs ("!") even if they are in 
single quotes.
To solve that, either put the sed code in its own file and run it with 

sed -f code.sed list_raw

or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know how is done with 
a C shell).

Two different systems same result.  What am I doing
wrong?

159 % uname -a
Linux XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2.4.37.5 #1 SMP Mon Aug 17 10:15:36 PDT 2009 i686 unknown
160 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
d: Event not found.
161 %


40 % uname -a
Linux XXXXXXXXXXXX 2.6.18-128.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Mon Jun 1 15:52:58 EDT 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
41 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
d: Event not found.
42 %


Thanks,

Vic

On comp.unix.shell, pk <pk@pk.invalid> wrote:
> me at wrote:
>
>> Two different systems same result.  What am I doing
>> wrong?
>> 
>> 159 % uname -a
>> Linux XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2.4.37.5 #1 SMP Mon Aug 17 10:15:36 PDT 2009 i686
>> unknown 160 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
>> d: Event not found.
>> 161 %
>> 
>> 
>> 40 % uname -a
>> Linux XXXXXXXXXXXX 2.6.18-128.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Mon Jun 1 15:52:58 EDT 2009
>> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux 41 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
>> d: Event not found.
>> 42 %
>

> You are using a C shell, which doesn't like bangs ("!") even if
> they are in single quotes. To solve that, either put the sed
> code in its own file and run it with
>
> sed -f code.sed list_raw
>
> or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know how
> is done with a C shell).

Better yet, us bash, like almost everyone else. 

I don't see why anyone bothers trying to help people using C shells.
Their choice of shells clearly establishes their lack of intelligence
and/or education.

Sid

Sidney Lambe wrote:
> On comp.unix.shell, pk <pk@pk.invalid> wrote:
>> me at wrote:
>>
>>> Two different systems same result.  What am I doing
>>> wrong?
>>>
>>> 159 % uname -a
>>> Linux XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2.4.37.5 #1 SMP Mon Aug 17 10:15:36 PDT 2009 i686
>>> unknown 160 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
>>> d: Event not found.
>>> 161 %
>>>
>>>
>>> 40 % uname -a
>>> Linux XXXXXXXXXXXX 2.6.18-128.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Mon Jun 1 15:52:58 EDT 2009
>>> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux 41 % sed '/^New/!d' list_raw | more
>>> d: Event not found.
>>> 42 %
> 
>> You are using a C shell, which doesn't like bangs ("!") even if
>> they are in single quotes. To solve that, either put the sed
>> code in its own file and run it with
>>
>> sed -f code.sed list_raw
>>
>> or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know how
>> is done with a C shell).
> 
> Better yet, us bash, like almost everyone else. 

Hardly "almost everyone". Better yet, use any modern POSIX shell. Anyway.
A warning about C shell would certainly be appropriate; @OP: see standard
lecture http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/

> 
> I don't see why anyone bothers trying to help people using C shells.
> Their choice of shells clearly establishes their lack of intelligence
> and/or education.

That has rarely to do with intelligence in the first place; with newbies
it's most probably just ignorance. If you don't know better you cannot make
a better decision. Nothing that can't be fixed.

Janis

> 
> Sid
> 
> 

On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
<janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote: [delete]

>>> or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know
>>> how is done with a C shell).
>>
>> Better yet, us bash, like almost everyone else.
>
> Hardly "almost everyone".

The overwhelming majority, unix or linux, in my experience.
It's the default shell on most linux distros and at least
some of the unix distros.

I think you hang out with more geeks than ordinary users :-)

> Better yet, use any modern POSIX shell. Anyway. A warning about
> C shell would certainly be appropriate; @OP: see standard
> lecture http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/

Sure is easier to use bash, which is a good as any of the other
POSIX shells and you are more likely to get help or be able
to give it.

>> I don't see why anyone bothers trying to help people using C
>> shells. Their choice of shells clearly establishes their lack
>> of intelligence and/or education.
>
> That has rarely to do with intelligence in the first place;
> with newbies it's most probably just ignorance. If you don't
> know better you cannot make a better decision. Nothing that
> can't be fixed.

Good way to look at it.

Sid

Elitist arrogant bastard, not that it should matter,

My first effort was

sed -f filename list_raw > list

but it results in

sed: file filename line 21: Unterminated `s'

 s/^New /!d

Have another beer, then try to be helpful,

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 04:43:31 +0000, me at did cat :

> Elitist arrogant bastard, not that it should matter,
> 
> My first effort was
> 
> sed -f filename list_raw > list
> 
> but it results in
> 
> sed: file filename line 21: Unterminated `s'
>  sed -n '/^New/p'
>  s/^New /!d
> 
> Have another beer, then try to be helpful,

in case your problem comes from the '!' try this workaround:
$ sed -n '/^New/p'  file

or maybe try it the funny way:
$ sed '/^[^N][^e][^w]/d' file

Loki Harfagr wrote:

>> sed -f filename list_raw > list
>> 
>> but it results in
>> 
>> sed: file filename line 21: Unterminated `s'
>>  sed -n '/^New/p'
>>  s/^New /!d
>> 
>> Have another beer, then try to be helpful,
> 
> in case your problem comes from the '!' try this workaround:
> $ sed -n '/^New/p'  file
> 
> or maybe try it the funny way:
> $ sed '/^[^N][^e][^w]/d' file

This is slightly different, as it will not delete things like /^Med/ or 
/^Nxx/ which the OP probably wants to delete.

Sidney Lambe wrote:
> On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
> <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote: [delete]
> 
>>>> or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know
>>>> how is done with a C shell).
>>> Better yet, us bash, like almost everyone else.
>> Hardly "almost everyone".
> 
> The overwhelming majority, unix or linux, in my experience.
> It's the default shell on most linux distros and at least
> some of the unix distros.

True for Linux. But you won't believe it; there's still a lot
commercial Unixes out there with Kornshell as default and that
don't have bash installed and the admins even not allowed to
install that bash beast.

> 
> I think you hang out with more geeks than ordinary users :-)

Probably :-)

Though the geeks of my kind are typically called Dinosaurs, so
letting the term Geeks available free for the Linux users who
continue the crusade of Unix users against the pest and some such.

Janis

> 
>> Better yet, use any modern POSIX shell. Anyway. A warning about
>> C shell would certainly be appropriate; @OP: see standard
>> lecture http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> 
> Sure is easier to use bash, which is a good as any of the other
> POSIX shells and you are more likely to get help or be able
> to give it.
> 
>>> I don't see why anyone bothers trying to help people using C
>>> shells. Their choice of shells clearly establishes their lack
>>> of intelligence and/or education.
>> That has rarely to do with intelligence in the first place;
>> with newbies it's most probably just ignorance. If you don't
>> know better you cannot make a better decision. Nothing that
>> can't be fixed.
> 
> Good way to look at it.
> 
> Sid
> 
> 
> 

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 11:42:40 +0100, pk did cat :

> Loki Harfagr wrote:
> 
>>> sed -f filename list_raw > list
>>> 
>>> but it results in
>>> 
>>> sed: file filename line 21: Unterminated `s'
>>>  sed -n '/^New/p'
>>>  s/^New /!d
>>> 
>>> Have another beer, then try to be helpful,
>> 
>> in case your problem comes from the '!' try this workaround: $ sed -n
>> '/^New/p'  file
>> 
>> or maybe try it the funny way:
>> $ sed '/^[^N][^e][^w]/d' file
> 
> This is slightly different, as it will not delete things like /^Med/ or
> /^Nxx/ which the OP probably wants to delete.

Yup, that's right, this should then do, steer crazy but working ;-)
$ <file sed '/^..[^w]/d' | sed '/^.[^e]./d' | sed '/^[^N]../d'

Loki Harfagr wrote:

> Sun, 28 Mar 2010 11:42:40 +0100, pk did cat :
> 
>> Loki Harfagr wrote:
>> 
>>>> sed -f filename list_raw > list
>>>> 
>>>> but it results in
>>>> 
>>>> sed: file filename line 21: Unterminated `s'
>>>>  sed -n '/^New/p'
>>>>  s/^New /!d
>>>> 
>>>> Have another beer, then try to be helpful,
>>> 
>>> in case your problem comes from the '!' try this workaround: $ sed -n
>>> '/^New/p'  file
>>> 
>>> or maybe try it the funny way:
>>> $ sed '/^[^N][^e][^w]/d' file
>> 
>> This is slightly different, as it will not delete things like /^Med/ or
>> /^Nxx/ which the OP probably wants to delete.
> 
> Yup, that's right, this should then do, steer crazy but working ;-)
> $ <file sed '/^..[^w]/d' | sed '/^.[^e]./d' | sed '/^[^N]../d'

Not yet :-)

You also have to consider lines *shorter* than three characters, which have 
to be deleted as well as there's obviously no way they can match /^New/:

$ <file sed '/^..[^w]/d' | sed '/^.[^e]./d' | sed '/^[^N]../d' | \
sed '/^.\{0,2\}$/d'

Removing some redundancy and putting everything in a single program, we have

$ <file sed '/^..[^w]/d;/^.[^e]/d; /^[^N]/d; /^.\{0,2\}$/d'

Seriosuly, use /^New/! and be happy :-)

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 16:34:37 +0100, pk did cat :

> Loki Harfagr wrote:
> 
>> Sun, 28 Mar 2010 11:42:40 +0100, pk did cat :
>> 
>>> Loki Harfagr wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> sed -f filename list_raw > list
>>>>> 
>>>>> but it results in
>>>>> 
>>>>> sed: file filename line 21: Unterminated `s'
>>>>>  sed -n '/^New/p'
>>>>>  s/^New /!d
>>>>> 
>>>>> Have another beer, then try to be helpful,
>>>> 
>>>> in case your problem comes from the '!' try this workaround: $ sed -n
>>>> '/^New/p'  file
>>>> 
>>>> or maybe try it the funny way:
>>>> $ sed '/^[^N][^e][^w]/d' file
>>> 
>>> This is slightly different, as it will not delete things like /^Med/
>>> or /^Nxx/ which the OP probably wants to delete.
>> 
>> Yup, that's right, this should then do, steer crazy but working ;-) $
>> <file sed '/^..[^w]/d' | sed '/^.[^e]./d' | sed '/^[^N]../d'
> 
> Not yet :-)
> 
> You also have to consider lines *shorter* than three characters, which
> have to be deleted as well as there's obviously no way they can match
> /^New/:

Oh! oops, er... yes! that's a really good black sunday for me !-D)

> 
> $ <file sed '/^..[^w]/d' | sed '/^.[^e]./d' | sed '/^[^N]../d' | \ sed
> '/^.\{0,2\}$/d'
> 
> Removing some redundancy and putting everything in a single program, we
> have
> 
> $ <file sed '/^..[^w]/d;/^.[^e]/d; /^[^N]/d; /^.\{0,2\}$/d'
> 
> Seriosuly, use /^New/! and be happy :-)

Oh well, yes, I wouldn't use the last posts I made, except " sed -n '/^New /p' "
but that was only in case the OP was really cornered to have and use ludicrous
extents ,-)

>>>>> "me" == me at <my.address@is.invalid> writes:

me> Hi,

me> This works great in vim, :v,^New,d
me> to delete all lines that do not begin with "New"

me> Please tell me the sed equiv so I can put it
me> into my #!/bin/sh script that I call from the
me> command line with sed -f

Wrong tool.  You want grep:

   grep -v '^New' <infile >outfile

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

>>>>> "Randal" == Randal L Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com> writes:

>>>>> "me" == me at <my.address@is.invalid> writes:
me> Hi,

me> This works great in vim, :v,^New,d
me> to delete all lines that do not begin with "New"

me> Please tell me the sed equiv so I can put it
me> into my #!/bin/sh script that I call from the
me> command line with sed -f

Randal> Wrong tool.  You want grep:

Randal>    grep -v '^New' <infile >outfile

And ugh, I read it backwards.  You want to *keep* "New" lines:

  grep '^New' <infile >outfile

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
<janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Sidney Lambe wrote:
>
>> On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
>> <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote: [delete]
>>
>>>>> or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know
>>>>> how is done with a C shell).
>>>>
>>>> Better yet, us bash, like almost everyone else.
>>>
>>> Hardly "almost everyone".
>>
>> The overwhelming majority, unix or linux, in my experience.
>> It's the default shell on most linux distros and at least some
>> of the unix distros.
>
> True for Linux. But you won't believe it; there's still a lot
> commercial Unixes out there with Kornshell as default and that
> don't have bash installed and the admins even not allowed to
> install that bash beast.
>
>
>> I think you hang out with more geeks than ordinary users :-)
>
> Probably :-)
>
> Though the geeks of my kind are typically called Dinosaurs, so
> letting the term Geeks available free for the Linux users who
> continue the crusade of Unix users against the pest and some
> such.
>
> Janis
>

I, for one, am sure glad you "dinosaurs" haven't gone extinct.

Linux is turning into a Windows clone (puke). I'm running an X-less
Slackware here and I like it. Screen is the best window manager
in existence.

[delete]

Sid

On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Sidney Lambe wrote:
>> On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
>> <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote: [delete]
>> 
>>>>> or disable history expansion (which, however, I don't know
>>>>> how is done with a C shell).
>>>> Better yet, us bash, like almost everyone else.
>>> Hardly "almost everyone".
>> 
>> The overwhelming majority, unix or linux, in my experience.
>> It's the default shell on most linux distros and at least
>> some of the unix distros.
>
> True for Linux. But you won't believe it; there's still a lot
> commercial Unixes out there with Kornshell as default and that
> don't have bash installed and the admins even not allowed to
> install that bash beast.
>
>> 
>> I think you hang out with more geeks than ordinary users :-)
>
> Probably :-)
>
> Though the geeks of my kind are typically called Dinosaurs, so
> letting the term Geeks available free for the Linux users who
> continue the crusade of Unix users against the pest and some such.
>
> Janis

Biggest mistake GNU made was developing emacs instead of going
with vi and using its dual mode design and keybindings with
all its utilities and apps.

Now what you have is a confusing mixture of vi apps like
screen and emacs apps like info.

[delete]

Sid

On Mar 28, 3:42=A0pm, Sidney Lambe <sidneyla...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
>
> <janis_papanag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Sidney Lambe wrote:
> > Though the geeks of my kind are typically called Dinosaurs, so
> > letting the term Geeks available free for the Linux users who
> > continue the crusade of Unix users against the pest and some
> > such.
>
> > Janis
>
> I, for one, am sure glad you "dinosaurs" haven't gone extinct.
>
> Linux is turning into a Windows clone (puke). I'm running an X-less
> Slackware here and I like it. Screen is the best window manager
> in existence.
>
> [delete]
>
> Sid

Here here for screen!  Been using it for 20 years!

As for "Linux" turning into a Windows clone, I assume you are talking
about the evolution of user environments such as Gnome and KDE.  This
is quite off topic and to get a little preachy and to slam certain
'vil corps, my philosophy is simple: anything that gets users on to
more stable, safer environments and off of crappy, proprietary,
expensive computer systems, is going to be better for the users, the
user community, the internet and quite probably the world in general.
While Mac computer hardware is closed, the OS itself is not all that
closed, it's based on OpenStep (which came from NextStep, a system I
worked with in the 80's).  Getting Windoze users to migrate to at
least Macs, get them one step closer to more stable and safer
computing, even if it is still on another super-egotist's more
expensive and proprietary computer system.  And that more stable,
safer computing is better for the user and for the net.

I'd prefer people to go to UNIX/Linux, but a large scale drive is not
there right now.  My wife was satisfied with Linux, except for the
fact that some Windows based codecs were not available for files she
received from relatives overseas.  I work in a worldwide corporation
where less than 0.1% of the personnel uses Linux/UNIX that I know of.
We manage well enough, but there are issues because we cannot view
Visio files, or have native Outlook support (an issue now with the
corporate IM service and with the calendar invites) and some of the
intranet apps still require IE6.  Myself, I'm amazed that developers
can work on winblows boxes, but they manage and I cannot convince the
majority of the development or QA teams to move to Linux.  I work very
well on my Ubuntu box and RedHat servers.  (One past company did move
the development division completely to Linux however).  But again,
developers and system analysts usually have different needs; as much
as I abhor them, developers cling to their IDEs, and most of those
IDEs these days are graphical in nature.

The first UNIX mainframes I was bought up on used ed with a real
teletype (keyboard with paper printout) and vi with the system
console.  My first computer was BASIC and machine code, not assembly
code; I wrote a mouse driver using a joystick.  Debugging was, and
often still is, with printf statments, not with gdb.   So I can relate
to what you are say, Sid.

But there should be a 'goal' to put UNIX/Linux on more computers in
the world. And to do that, it has to be more accessible to the
users.   I don't think that it means Linux has to be a Windoze clone,
just that it has to have the same capabilities in whatever form.

  -Arcege

On comp.unix.shell, Arcege <arcege@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 28, 3:42=A0pm, Sidney Lambe <sidneyla...@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On comp.unix.shell, Janis Papanagnou
>>
>> <janis_papanag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Sidney Lambe wrote: Though the geeks of my kind are
>> > typically called Dinosaurs, so letting the term Geeks
>> > available free for the Linux users who continue the crusade
>> > of Unix users against the pest and some such.
>>
>> > Janis
>>
>> I, for one, am sure glad you "dinosaurs" haven't gone extinct.
>>
>> Linux is turning into a Windows clone (puke). I'm running an
>> X-less Slackware here and I like it. Screen is the best window
>> manager in existence.
>>
>> [delete]
>>
>> Sid
>
> Here here for screen! Been using it for 20 years!

The best of GNU.

> As for "Linux" turning into a Windows clone, I assume you are
> talking about the evolution of user environments such as Gnome
> and KDE.

Yes indeed.

> This is quite off topic and to get a little preachy
> and to slam certain 'vil corps, my philosophy is simple:
> anything that gets users on to more stable, safer environments
> and off of crappy, proprietary, expensive computer systems,
> is going to be better for the users, the user community, the
> internet and quite probably the world in general. While Mac
> computer hardware is closed, the OS itself is not all that
> closed, it's based on OpenStep (which came from NextStep, a
> system I worked with in the 80's). Getting Windoze users to
> migrate to at least Macs, get them one step closer to more
> stable and safer computing, even if it is still on another
> super-egotist's more expensive and proprietary computer system.
> And that more stable, safer computing is better for the user
> and for the net.

Makes sense.

> I'd prefer people to go to UNIX/Linux, but a large scale drive
> is not there right now. My wife was satisfied with Linux,
> except for the fact that some Windows based codecs were not
> available for files she received from relatives overseas.
> I work in a worldwide corporation where less than 0.1% of
> the personnel uses Linux/UNIX that I know of. We manage well
> enough, but there are issues because we cannot view Visio
> files, or have native Outlook support (an issue now with the
> corporate IM service and with the calendar invites) and some of
> the intranet apps still require IE6. Myself, I'm amazed that
> developers can work on winblows boxes, but they manage and I
> cannot convince the majority of the development or QA teams to
> move to Linux. I work very well on my Ubuntu box and RedHat
> servers. (One past company did move the development division
> completely to Linux however). 

> But again, developers and system analysts usually have
> different needs; as much as I abhor them, developers cling to
> their IDEs, and most of those IDEs these days are graphical in
> nature.

They cling to them mostly because the people who pay their
salaries are interested in mass markets, and eye-candy and
a free hand for junk food and the TV remote or a cell phone
are what the masses want.

> The first UNIX mainframes I was bought up on used ed with a
> real teletype (keyboard with paper printout) and vi with the
> system console. My first computer was BASIC and machine code,
> not assembly code; I wrote a mouse driver using a joystick.
> Debugging was, and often still is, with printf statments, not
> with gdb. So I can relate to what you are say, Sid.

Machine code!  That's hardcore.

> But there should be a 'goal' to put UNIX/Linux on more
> computers in the world. And to do that, it has to be more
> accessible to the users. I don't think that it means Linux
> has to be a Windoze clone, just that it has to have the same
> capabilities in whatever form.
>
>   -Arcege

The problem is, Arcege, that people who use desktop environments
like KDE/Gnome learn those application suites, not Linux, and
thereby become ignorant appliance operators instead of hackers.

Who is financing these interfaces? Allies of M$. It is, literally,
a plot to destroy Linux by removing the user technical base.

One can make a very user friendly interface using screen and
shell script menus. I have one I have cobbled together and it
works great. I can run X if I want. I just control it
from the console.

(I'm learning ANSI escapes in order to make limited use
of the 'popup' menus and displays they can provide via
shellscripts, without even using ncurses or slang, etc.)

This _is_ OT. I am going to email you, if you don't mind.

Sid

:wq
(And that's vi, _not_ vim or elvis or...)

freelance writer

freelance writer

freelance writer