[PATCH] doc: mention glibc bug 24269

[Paul Eggert]

* doc/regex.texi (Back-reference Operator): Add glibc bug 24269.
Reformat slightly so that it looks nicer in the Grep manual.
---
 ChangeLog      |  6 ++++++
 doc/regex.texi | 14 ++++++++------
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index a1866e0b3..09564ed3e 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2020-01-02  Paul Eggert  <address@hidden>
+
+       doc: mention glibc bug 24269
+       * doc/regex.texi (Back-reference Operator): Add glibc bug 24269.
+       Reformat slightly so that it looks nicer in the Grep manual.
+
 2020-01-02  Bruno Haible  <address@hidden>
 
        mbrtowc: Don't replace mbstate_t on MSVC.
diff --git a/doc/regex.texi b/doc/regex.texi
index a4174445e..91d6bb7b4 100644
--- a/doc/regex.texi
+++ b/doc/regex.texi
@@ -1150,12 +1150,14 @@ and memory to explore.  Also, the POSIX specification 
for
 back-references is at times unclear.  Furthermore, many regular
 expression implementations have back-reference bugs that can cause
 programs to return incorrect answers or even crash, and fixing these
-bugs has often been low-priority---for example, as of 2019 the GNU C
-library bug database contained back-reference bugs
-@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52,52},
-@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10844,10844},
-@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11053,11053},
-and @url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25322,25322},
+bugs has often been low-priority: for example, as of 2020 the
+@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/,GNU C library bug database}
+contained back-reference bugs
+@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52,,52},
+@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10844,,10844},
+@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11053,,11053},
+@url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24269,,24269}
+and @url{https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25322,,25322},
 with little sign of forthcoming fixes.  Luckily,
 back-references are rarely useful and it should be little trouble to
 avoid them in practical applications.
-- 
2.24.1