Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 02:16:41 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Patch for cp(1) Message-ID: <20050402015901.K24966@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <200504011517.j31FHxTO084986@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20050330181904.16519571@mobile.pittgoth.com> <20050401191850.Q24028@delplex.bde.org> <200504011517.j31FHxTO084986@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Garrett Wollman wrote: > <<On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:43:02 +1000 (EST), Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> said: > > [cp -r] >> I think we don't need to keep it except for POSIX compatibility. > >> New programs just shouldn't use cp -r. Old programs that use cp -r >> shouldn't have its behaviour changed. > > I'm more concerned about humans. Removing the option is best for humans. -r is the same as -R under Linux (linux_base_8), and it isn't even deprecated in cp --help at least, so it won't go away, and fingers will be trained to use it in preference to -R, for at least another 20 years. This reminds me that I rarely actually use cp -R, since it is too broken to use -- it snaps hard links, unlike Linux cp. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050402015901.K24966>