As several people have pointed out, mv(1) traditionally failed to rename
_directories_ across filesystems, but would invoke cp(1) followed by
rm(1) for individual files.

The intent of invoking cp(1) followed by rm(1) was to maintain the
semantics of a rename, modulo the fact that hard links cannot span
filesystems.  The introduction of _POSIX_RESTRICTED_CHOWN added another
point in which rename semantics could not be exactly preserved.  At that
time, the choice was made to report to the user if the call to fchown(2)
failed.  Given that we can assume _POSIX_RESTRICTED_CHOWN, should we be
trying this call to fchown(2)?  i.e., should NetBSD mv(1) have different
semantics in superuser state?

--
				Jim Wise
				jim.wise@turner.com