Re: cp -n diff

To: Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
Subject: Re: cp -n diff
From: "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 08:02:15 -0400

On Thu, 05 May 2011 06:53:06 +0700
Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost> wrote:
> However, I also don't see any significant difference between this
> proposed -n flag, and the -l flag that was added to cp a couple of
> months ago.

The main difference is that -l doesn't quite duplicate functionality in
the base system.  Pax comes close but is not quite the same.  Check the
archives for the end of that discussion.  It has to do with the way
symlinks are handled.

By the way, rsync does do the right thing and makes the -l option
unnecessary but that is not in base.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy%NetBSD.org@localhost>
http://www.NetBSD.org/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: cp -n diff
  - From: David Holland
- Re: cp -n diff
  - From: Zafer Aydoğan

References:
- Re: cp -n diff
  - From: Iain Hibbert
- cp -n diff
  - From: Zafer Aydoğan
- Re: cp -n diff
  - From: Robert Elz

Prev by Date: Re: cp -n diff
Next by Date: Re: cp -n diff
Previous by Thread: Re: cp -n diff
Next by Thread: Re: cp -n diff
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index