Hi,
I recently deteted that if I use mv --reply=no, it doesn't behave as if I
pressed 'n' on mv -i. The reason seems to be usage of the first "UNWRITABLE"
in the following lines from src/copy.c (the 2nd one seems ok...):
if (x->move_mode)
{
if ((x->interactive == I_ALWAYS_NO
&& UNWRITABLE (dst_path, dst_sb.st_mode))
|| ((x->interactive == I_ASK_USER
|| (x->interactive == I_UNSPECIFIED
&& x->stdin_tty
&& UNWRITABLE (dst_path, dst_sb.st_mode)))
&& (overwrite_prompt (dst_path, &dst_sb), 1)
&& ! yesno ()))
{
/* Pretend the rename succeeded, so the caller (mv)
doesn't end up removing the source file. */
if (rename_succeeded)
*rename_succeeded = 1;
return 0;
}
}
so that the 'no' is assumed only if the mv would fail because of missing
rights.
Is there a reason for this? The info page says
`--reply[=HOW]'
Specifying `--reply=yes' is equivalent to using `--force'.
Specify `--reply=no' to make `mv' act as if `no' were given as a
response to every prompt about a destination file. Specify
`--reply=query' to make `mv' prompt the user about each existing
destination file.
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
