Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 11:03:51AM -0700, Tim Haley wrote: >> ZFS specifically supports this renaming. It is 'mv' and the CIFS server >> that are causing you grief here. >> >> spidey% zfs create -o casesensitivity=insensitive tank/timh/ins >> spidey% cd /tank/timh/ins >> spidey% echo 'this is a file' > myfile >> spidey% ls >> myfile >> spidey% mv myfile Myfile >> mv: myfile and Myfile are identical >> spidey% ~/rename myfile Myfile >> spidey% ls >> Myfile >> >> The rename program used here is a simple utility that calls rename(2). > > Should a CR be filed against mv(1) here? Or an RFE for an option to it > that obviates the identical file check, at least on case-insensitive > file systems?
Fromm an mv perspective this is indistinguishable from having multiple links to a file. > (On case-sensitive filesystems skipping the identical file check would > probably be surprising, though, of course, the identical file check can > race anyways.) > >> mv(1) does lookups on the file names provided and if it gets the same >> answer for both it decides it has nothing to do. >> >> This is of course, sort of wanting your cake and wanting to eat it, too. >> [1] This is case-insensitivity except when it is inconvenient. :-) >> Presumably the CIFS server *could* special case this behavior. > > Yes, but we're talking about the shell. I agree that this is a case > where one should be able to have and eat their cake -- after call, the > filesystem may be case-insensitive, but it is case-preserving, and if > the canonical case of a filename matters to a user then they should be > able to set it. mv foo bar; mv bar Foo Alan _______________________________________________ storage-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
