Re: Adding -l option to cp

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 10:35:24PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <00BED867-3DBD-42EE-8773-EB490EB369BB%gmail.com@localhost>,
> Adam Hamsik  <haaaad%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> >
> >Just for the record it can be done with pax -r -w -l.
> 
> Does it really matter? Don't we have tools that have overlapping functionality
> already? It is simple enough to add, and it does not add a lot of maintenance
> overhead. In terms of userland utility innovation there is solaris at one
> end of the spectrum and linux at the other. I think it is better to be
> somewhere in the middle.

The most important point is that the patch doesn't seem to make cp
behave as advertised. It makes cp not *copy*. So if the goal is to have
a tree-level link create program, that sounds like a good reason to add
-R to ln, but not a good reason to add it to cp.

Joerg