2008/6/14 Philip Rowlands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > You might find rsync to be a better tool for this task. It's more robust > against partial-copy failures, and has the nice property that copied files > will all carry the same mtime, whereas cp -u will not attempt to replicate > timestamps (from a cursory check). >
Ok, rsync might be better for this task (it seems to be quite a cpu hog though). But if you forget that, imho the 'cp -u' does not work as it should, so it is a bug. Cheers, Markku _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
