Re: Patch for "mv -s" option

[Paul Jarc]

Brendan Byrd/SineSwiper <address@hidden> wrote:
> I think my main point is that this is not a serious limitation, or at 
> least one that was never brought up until now.  It's apparently been in 
> the copy.c code for eons.  There must be some reason for this limitation 
> to be put in place

Oh, certainly: for symlinks, relative target paths are interpreted
relative to the symlink's directory, not the directory where you ran
the program from.  So to support all cases, the program would have to
convert the target path given on the command line to one that meant
the same thing when interpreted relative to the symlink's directory.
There isn't always a unique way of doing this, due to other symlinks
to directories, etc.


paul