Subject: RE: old cp not compatible with current namei()
To: proprietor - Foo Bar And Grill <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Graham, James <James.Graham@Schwab.COM>
Date: 05/19/1997 09:11:10
Looking at what was/is going on, this smells of hackery of the
most offensive kind.
To quote a phrase,
"Was this trip _really_ necessary?"
> From: Klaus Klein[SMTP:email@example.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 1997 7:43 AM
> To: proprietor - Foo Bar And Grill
> Cc: current-users@NetBSD.ORG
> Subject: Re: old cp not compatible with current namei()
> On Mon, 19 May 1997 06:25:54 -0700 (PDT)
> proprietor - Foo Bar And Grill <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Okay, while POSIX compatibility is a questionably desirable thing,
> > has anyone fixed cp to be compatible with namei()?
> > # cp netbsd /
> > overwrite /netbsd? y
> > cp: : No such file or directory
> > #
> This particular bug was fixed one day after committing the namei()
> changes. As a sidenote, I've introduced another bug in cp(1) by
> doing that, but today's supscan contains a fixed version.