> Being the `sinner' who originally changed the semantics of namei() to
> its current behavior, I'd like to point out that this is the Right
> Way, speaking in terms of POSIX; this also includes cp(1).
[...]
> In a nutshell: The current semantics of namei() conform to POSIX
>                (which has to be regarded as the right behaviour),

Why is the POSIX way necessarily Right?  If POSIX requires this bizarre
behavior of cp, as described by several people, then I think POSIX is
broken badly enough that conformance to this aspect of it is not worth
the damage it requires.

					der Mouse

			       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
		     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B