To: Richard Dawe Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com, JT Williams , GNU fileutils Subject: Re: cp -if References: <20020628133023 DOT GB19395 AT kendall DOT sfbr DOT org> <3D1ECBF0 DOT 2E1E3EB9 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <1026506590 DOT 787398 AT queeg DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> <20020713132932 DOT GA18926 AT kendall DOT sfbr DOT org> <3D31AC05 DOT B2CB7082 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> In-Reply-To: <3D31AC05.B2CB7082@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> (Richard Dawe's message of "Sun, 14 Jul 2002 17:51:17 +0100") From: Jim Meyering Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 00:16:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87fzymvttk.fsf@pixie.eng.ascend.com> Lines: 40 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.3.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Richard Dawe wrote: > JT Williams wrote: >> >> -: : "* cp's -f option no longer cancels the effect of --interactive (-i) >> -: : (per POSIX)" >> -: >> -: Ouch. So how do we override "-i"? There's a relatively new option just for that. It was added in 4.1.1. Here's the NEWS entry: * mv and cp accept a new option: --reply={yes,no,query}; provides a consistent mechanism to control whether one is prompted about certain existing destination files. Note that cp's and mv's -f options don't have the same meaning: cp's -f option no longer merely turns off `-i'. and here's the --help entry: --reply={yes,no,query} specify how to handle the prompt about an existing destination file >> Ouch, indeed. And why only cp? mv -i can still be overridden. POSIX requires that cp's -f do this and only this: -f, --force if an existing destination file cannot be opened, remove it and try again POSIX requires that mv's -f override mv's -i. > I don't know why it's only cp. I had a quick look at draft 7 of the Austin In the sections for cp and mv (I search for `cp - ' and `mv - ' in d7text.txt), it's pretty clear that the two -f options are supposed to do different things. > Group's work, which became part of the new POSIX standard. I can't see where > the behaviour of cp, mv is described. I've CC'd bug-fileutils. Hopefully > someone on that list can answer your question. ...