> I agree that reading a pipe or socket should block until someone writes it. > What I need is a way to tell cp to not read them but just copy them > without having to give it the -R option, since I don't want recursion.
Hmm... Yes, that would be useful! > What do you think about -p forcing this behavior? Or adding another flag > (or flags if you want to seperate pipes from sockets) such as > --dont-read-pipes --dont-read-sockets ? There are already too many options already. Perhaps this would be most appropriate with the --preserve functionalty. Perhaps --preserve=pipes or something similar. cp --preserve=links,pipes foo bar Or shouldn't 'all' preserve pipes? cp --preserve=all foo bar > Or +R to reverse the effects of -R (because -a is -dpR) so I could > do cp -a +R ? Options starting with a + were previously used for long options such as +recursive but for various reasons that many are not happy with that was changed to the more standard compliant behavior of long options starting with a double dash as in --recursive. Once burned and twice shy there. I don't remember the full reasons but I would avoid options starting with a +. > Or a number to specify the depth of recursion so I could use 1? > > What I do now is run `find . ! -type d ! -type s ! -type p -maxdepth > 1' to generate the list of files for cp to examine which seems hacky > (not to mention slow). Not to distract from the discussion of preserving pipes as pipes, how about the following? I would think this would be faster. Although it does have ARG_MAX limitations. for f in *; do test -f $f && echo $f; done Bob _______________________________________________ Bug-fileutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-fileutils
