[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I also would favor (B). But we certainly need testsuite additions to >> >> ensure that we don't introduce future regressions against this decision. >> > >> > OK, it'll be harder to test (B), since that relies on the test suite >> > knowing what rename() does. But I guess we can work around that. >> >> It shouldn't be hard. >> Just run a little perl snippet to determine what rename() does, >> and base the expected results on that. > > A problem exists with configure testing for kernel behavior and then
Whoops. Stop right there ;-) We're talking about the test suite performing a test of kernel behavior, so that it (the test suite for mv) knows which rename() semantics are in effect. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
