So I responded with 2 reasons why we might not make 'y' imply '-f'
for unwritable files.
P@, I'm afraid those reasons did not make sense to me. Can you restate?
Sorry.
To restate my own idea: from my "(not so) naive user"'s point of view,
going to the trouble of typing "y RET" is the most forceful expression
possible of the desired behavior, namely that I want the darn file to
get copied. So, if cp -f would work, I would like answering "y" to work.
(And, I believe the other user's request amounts to saying "if cp -f
would not work, then don't even bother to ask me". I don't feel
strongly about that request. :)
code complexity it never a reason for not doing something.
I suspect we all agree ... in theory :).
Thanks,
karl
