Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 12:19:12 -0500 From: "Rick C. Petty" <rick-freebsd@kiwi-computer.com> To: Garance A Drosehn <gad@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] adding two new options to 'cp' Message-ID: <20060801171912.GC3413@megan.kiwi-computer.com> In-Reply-To: <p06230908c0f53813965d@[128.113.24.47]> References: <44CE03D2.2050803@centtech.com> <17614.4005.407223.621637@bhuda.mired.org> <44CE199C.2020500@centtech.com> <17614.8289.134373.387558@bhuda.mired.org> <96b30c400607310847s1d2f845eo212b234d03f51e9a@mail.gmail.com> <17614.10982.499561.139268@bhuda.mired.org> <ealpn1$lan$1@sea.gmane.org> <20060801072611.GA717@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <ean95a$e1u$1@sea.gmane.org> <p06230908c0f53813965d@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 01:06:55PM -0400, Garance A Drosehn wrote: > > The point is not that you need an explicit switch, the > point is that you have to add a lot of code to 'cp' for > 'cp' to do the job correctly. Not really. See my example in a previous post. All you need to do is perform an lseek(2) instead of a write(2) if the block you read is all zero. > You are changing the nature of how the command works. No, you're adding features, not changing the behavior for the default case. > I very much doubt you > can implement that *correctly* in a mere 160 bytes of > additional object code! I'd be willing to bet that my aforementioned example would fit in that space-- because you already do an fstat & the read/write code-- the only thing to add is the zero-checking and seek ahead code. > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 15348 [date] /bin/cp > -r-xr-xr-x 2 root wheel 44288 [date] /sbin/dump > -r-xr-xr-x 2 root wheel 58736 [date] /sbin/restore dump/restore is significantly different in operation than cp. Both do a lot more than just copy files. Also dump/restore is specific to UFS and my example code would handle sparse files for any filesystem. > I realize a lot of these decisions are somewhat subjective. > "One person's feature is another person's bloat". But in > the case of this specific example, I (personally) would > not want 'cp' to implement every detail which is already > handled by dump/restore. I don't think this is what people are asking for. BTW, does dump/restore handle extended attributes? Last I checked, it didn't. But then again I don't think cp or tar do either. Feel free to enlighten me. -- Rick C. Petty
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060801171912.GC3413>