Conor MacNeill wrote: > Don, > > Currently, overwrite means to overwrite the file even if the destination > file is newer, not to overwrite it at all costs. I am a little wary about > overwriting read-only files. How do other people feel about this?
I'm a big -1 on this. Usually you don't mark a file read-only unless you have a good reason to; arbirarily overwriting it by getting around the OS file protection mechanism is *not* a good idea. > > > Conor > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Don Ferguson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:41 AM > Subject: [PATCH] copy with overwrite > > > Under NT, attempts to copy over a read-only file raises a > > java.io.FileNotFoundException, even with the overwrite flag > > on. This patch causes the file to first be deleted if overwrite > > is true, and if the destination file cannot be written. > >
