Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:30:07 -0800 (PST) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: bin/25015: cp: options -i and -f do not work as documented Message-ID: <200102121530.f1CFU7M87728@freefall.freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
The following reply was made to PR bin/25015; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To: mkamm@gmx.net
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: bin/25015: cp: options -i and -f do not work as documented
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:23:25 -0500 (EST)
<<On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 21:48:55 +0100 (CET), mkamm@gmx.net said:
> Option -f is supposed to unlink targets before the copy takes
> place. (This makes a great difference with respect to permissions and
> especially with targets that are neither plain files nor directories.)
Actually, no. The POSIX 1003.1-200x draft states:
a. If dest_file exists, the following steps shall be taken:
i. If the -i option is in effect, the cp utility shall write a
prompt to the standard error and read a line from the standard
input. If the response is not affirmative, cp shall do nothing
more with source_file and go on to any remaining files.
ii. A file descriptor for dest_file shall be obtained by
performing actions equivalent to the open( ) function defined
in the System Interfaces volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-200x called
using dest_file as the path argument, and the
bitwise-inclusive OR of O_WRONLY and O_TRUNC as the oflag
argument.
It goes on to say that if and only if (ii) fails, cp shall unlink the
destination file and try again.
Hmmm. If dest_file is a dangling symbolic link, does it exist or not?
It's not obvious to me; I'll file an Aardvark against the
specification.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102121530.f1CFU7M87728>