On Sep 12, 2009, at 18:24 , Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:In order to handle the case where you're moving across filesystems, mv(1) gracefully degrades to cp + rm. rename(2) does not. This also happens to work around compatibility issues with native CIFS (and possibly older HP/UX, not that anyone likely cares).I don't think that darcs is ever likely to want to do a move across filesystems - unless
I'm not claiming it does, only explaining why mv(1) is *not* identical to rename(2) as claimed. It also happens to be true that it will do something instead of failing if the destination exists and is a directory (but possibly not what you want).
-- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
