[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bad cp -a behaviour
From: |
Philip Rowlands |
Subject: |
Re: Bad cp -a behaviour |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:36:54 +0100 (BST) |
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Tim Waugh wrote:
>Thinking about it, it must be order-specific. But here's the output I
>get:
>
>`2/d/3' -> `1/d/3'
>`2/d/2' -> `1/d/2'
>`2/d/1' -> `1/d/1'
>`2/d/4' -> `1/d/4'
OK, so this is a filesystem-dependent issue when using --recursive on
source and destination directories which both contain hard links.
I don't know the specs to which GNU cp adheres well enough, but I'd be
surprised if they mandate a sort routine for recursive copying.
Conversely, it's particularly confusing of cp to throw up its hands and
claim "undefined" in this scenario. I'd think the cp_hash code probably
has a role to play here, but I'm not sure I'm qualified to start hacking
it around. Any AUTHORS in the list??
Cheers,
Phil
- Bad cp -a behaviour, Tim Waugh, 2004/08/07
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Andreas Schwab, 2004/08/07
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Philip Rowlands, 2004/08/07
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Tim Waugh, 2004/08/10
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Philip Rowlands, 2004/08/11
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Tim Waugh, 2004/08/11
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour,
Philip Rowlands <=
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Tim Waugh, 2004/08/11
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Paul Eggert, 2004/08/11
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Tim Waugh, 2004/08/12
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Philip Rowlands, 2004/08/12
- Re: Bad cp -a behaviour, Andreas Schwab, 2004/08/12