Bert Wesarg wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 16:15, Jim Meyering <j...@meyering.net> wrote: >> cp and mv work the same way: even with --backup, they refuse to move >> aside a destination directory. > Which does not seem to be correct, mv backups target directories: > > $ mkdir a b > $ touch c > $ \mv --no-target-directory --backup=numbered b a > $ \mv --no-target-directory --backup=numbered c a > $ \ls > a a.~1~ a.~2~ > $ > > But mv could not be used for the backup() alias: > > $ \mv --no-target-directory --backup=numbered a a > mv: `a' and `a' are the same file > $ \mv --no-target-directory --backup=numbered -f a a > mv: `a' and `a' are the same file > >> Maybe someone will volunteer to do the work. >> > However, the trivial patch below solves the case for cp and ln and > still passes the test suit: > > ---8<--- > Subject: [PATCH] cp, ln: backup target directories
Hi Bert, Thanks for the patch! I'll review it Monday or Tuesday. In the mean time, do you feel like writing the remaining parts of such a change? - mention this in NEWS: put it under Changes in behavior or Improvements - add tests of cp and ln that exercise the new behavior, i.e., that fail with the current/old tools and pass with your changes - possibly adjust doc/coreutils.texi
