Subject: RE: old cp not compatible with current namei()
To: Graham, James <James.Graham@Schwab.COM>
From: Scott Reynolds <scottr@Plexus.COM>
Date: 05/19/1997 14:34:42
On Mon, 19 May 1997, Graham, James wrote:
> Looking at what was/is going on, this smells of hackery of the
> most offensive kind.
Hackery? Hardly. Note that the only utility affected by the change was
cp(1), which is pretty strong evidence that it was a hidden bug all along.
> To quote a phrase,
> "Was this trip _really_ necessary?"
In a word: yes.