Stephane Chazelas <stephane.chaze...@gmail.com> wrote, on 07 Nov 2016:
>
> BTW, there's an issue in the spec for "mv":
>
> > EXIT STATUS
> >
> > The following exit values shall be returned:
> >
> > 0
> > All input files were moved successfully.
> > >0
> > An error occurred.
>
> In
>
> mv -i a b
>
> if the user says "no", "a" will not be moved successfully, and
> there will not have been any error.
Good catch.
> Should probably be something like:
>
> 0
> All input files (approved by the user with -i) were
> moved successfully.
We should change it to match rm, which says:
Each directory entry was successfully removed, unless its removal
was canceled by a non-affirmative response to a prompt for
confirmation.
> Also, should failure to write the prompt or read the answer be
> considered an error?
I would say yes.
> Using:
>
> mv -i a b 2>&- <&-
>
> or
>
> mv -i a b < /dev/null 2>&-
However, that's not a valid test because of the following text on the
execl() page:
If file descriptor 0, 1, or 2 would otherwise be closed after
a successful call to one of the exec family of functions,
implementations may open an unspecified file for the file descriptor
in the new process image. If a standard utility or a conforming
application is executed with file descriptor 0 not open for reading
or with file descriptor 1 or 2 not open for writing, the environment
in which the utility or application is executed shall be deemed
non-conforming, and consequently the utility or application might
not behave as described in this standard.
--
Geoff Clare <g.cl...@opengroup.org>
The Open Group, Apex Plaza, Forbury Road, Reading, RG1 1AX, England
