Re: A change with the -n option for cp in Mac OS X 10.5
Re: A change with the -n option for cp in Mac OS X 10.5
- Subject: Re: A change with the -n option for cp in Mac OS X 10.5
- From: Eric Gorr <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 09:19:49 -0500
Kevin Van Vechten wrote:
> Eric Gorr wrote:
>
> > Is this the right place for this question?
>
>
> Yes.
>
>
> > Under 10.4.10, when executing cp -n, cp would return an exit
> > status of 0 if the file you told it to copy existed or not.
> >
> > Under 10.5, cp will return an exit status of 1 if the file
> > already exists and one uses the -n option.
> >
> > I was just wondering if:
> >
> >
> > 1. 10.4.10 had a bug
> > 2. 10.5 has a bug
> > 3. the definition of how the -n option is supposed to work
has changed
> >
> >
> > It seems strange that cp would return an exit status of 1 now if
> > the file already exists. After all, the command will do exactly
what
> > it is supposed to do and not copy the file.
>
>
> I suppose it was #3. It looks like the exit status was changed due to
> feedback that returning a zero exit status gives no way to determine
> whether or not a file was actually copied (<rdar://problem/3624563>).
> This is a divergence from the FreeBSD behavior in 10.4.10 (FreeBSD
> introduced the non-standard -n flag). Because -n is non-standard[1],
> I'd recommend against using it.
Ok, thanks.
Still seems strange that it would be considered an error if the
command does what it is told to do.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden