[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored
From: |
Karl Berry |
Subject: |
bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:53:21 GMT |
Well, I concur that the new wording is an improvement in that it reduces
expectations, but is it really so impractical to get the behavior that
is actually to be desired? I expect the sources are much too advanced
for it to be something like "force++;" after getting the "y" response :),
but maybe ... something ... ?
The current behavior is noticeably frustrating, because it seems so
unnecessarily stupid.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-03/msg00130.html
Thus, I also agree with that person's frustration in the other
direction, although for me it is the situation that I complained about
that comes up far more often -- unnecessarily failing to overwrite
writable files, rather than unnecessarily asking about unwritable files.
But I'm not volunteering to write a patch, and I know the logic in this
area is a maze of twisty little passages, some alike and some different,
so ...
thanks,
k
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Karl Berry, 2014/03/24
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Pádraig Brady, 2014/03/24
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Paul Eggert, 2014/03/25
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Bernhard Voelker, 2014/03/26
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Pádraig Brady, 2014/03/26
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Paul Eggert, 2014/03/26
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Pádraig Brady, 2014/03/26
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Karl Berry, 2014/03/27
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Bernhard Voelker, 2014/03/27
- bug#17087: cp -i/yes gets ignored, Pádraig Brady, 2014/03/27