Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Pádraig Brady on 12/22/2008 6:55 AM:
>> Well I wouldn't treat -n differently if one must be able to specify both -f
>> and -i.
>> But does POSIX really specify that? I can't see it from a quick read.
>> All I can see are a mention of the -HLP options:
>
> Huh? http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/mv.html
> only specified -i and -f, and none of -HLP.
>
> Oh, you were looking at cp. But still, the synopsis on
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/cp.html lists
> three forms:
>
> cp [-Pfip] source_file target_file
Thanks for the clarification. So POSIX mandates all of -fin are allowed,
the last taking precedence. I presume it also means warnings should not be
printed.
In any case I think the `mv` descriptions should we reworded to something like:
-f rename a file even if the destination is present and not writable
(overrides any previous -i or -n option).
-i always prompt before overwriting an existing file
(overrides any previous -f or -n option).
-n never overwrite an existing file
(overrides any previous -f or -i option).
And for `cp` s/rename/overwrite/ in the -f description.
cheers,
Pádraig.
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
