me@here:~$ touch quux me@here:~$ mkdir foo me@here:~$ ln -s ../quux foo/quux me@here:~$ ls -l foo total 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 me us 7 Dec 11 07:59 quux -> ../quux me@here:~$ cp -r foo bar me@here:~$ ls -l bar total 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 me us 7 Dec 11 07:59 quux -> ../quux IMHO (and I don't think I'm alone) this is the wrong behavior for cp. cp should have made a copy of quux, not another symlink to quux. If I wanted a symlink I would have used tar. Yes, I've found the -L switch, but this has always been the default behavior. Maybe this new behavior could happen only if the -R switch is used? I'd appreciate a reply (even if it's just "Well we like it better this way and that's that"). Thanks, -- Ben Slusky | It is amazing how many eggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] | one can break without making a "will program for food" | decent omelette. PGP keyID ADA44B3B | -Charles P. Issawi _______________________________________________ Bug-fileutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-fileutils
