On Friday 17 April 2009 18:28:07 James Youngman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Jim Meyering <[email protected]> wrote: > > diff --git a/src/copy.c b/src/copy.c > > index 9b0e139..3cbeba4 100644 > > --- a/src/copy.c > > +++ b/src/copy.c > > @@ -699,10 +699,6 @@ copy_reg (char const *src_name, char const > > *dst_name, goto close_src_and_dst_desc; > > } > > last_write_made_hole = false; > > - > > - /* A short read on a regular file means EOF. */ > > - if (n_read != buf_size && S_ISREG (src_open_sb.st_mode)) > > - break; > > } > > } > > The patch itself looks good, but it might be worth leaving in a > comment indicating why the optimisation should not be reintroduced...
and/or a new test (i prefer the "and"): if [ -e /proc/cpuinfo ] ; then cp /proc/cpuinfo cpuinfo.cp cat /proc/cpuinfo > cpuinfo.cat cmp cpuinfo.cp cpuinfo.cat fi -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
