On Friday 28 March 2008 16:22, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 09:44 -0500, Kevin Holland wrote: > > You have to use something like > > cat myfile > /dev/mtdblock/1 > > because you don't have a filesystem mounted to that mtdblock I'm > > assuming. If there is a filesystem you would mount it then copy the > > file to the mountpoint. > > Kevin > > Yeah, I know the cat trick works but so should cp too, I think. Earlier > I used GNU cp and that worked like that. Compare with symlinks, cp > copies the contents, not the symlink itself(unless -d or -P is given)
Well, GNU cp also copies TO dest symlink's target too, which is incredibly careless. Hell knows where that symlink points - /etc/passwd? /dev/sda? Cool, eh? Instead of wanting cp to be a mix of copy and cat, why don't you use cat when you want to say "please open and read from this file/device/pipe"? That would be unambiguous. (Same holds for writing TO things - use >file). As it stands now, cp's code is already a maze of heuristics "what user actually wants, dammit?" -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
