[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Jarc) wrote:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> $ echo a > a/foo
>>> $ echo b > b/foo
>>> $ mv -i --reply=no a/foo b/foo
>>> $ cat b/foo
>>> a
>>
>> That's because -i is equivalent to --reply=query (as mentioned in --help),
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 11:41:33AM -0400, Paul Jarc wrote:
> I think that's what Tim expected. But b/foo was replaced with a/foo,
> in spite of --reply=no. The same thing happens for me with 5.2.1.
Well, I didn't expect --reply=no to override the -i; I had thought
(without reading the documenta
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> $ echo a > a/foo
>> $ echo b > b/foo
>> $ mv -i --reply=no a/foo b/foo
>> $ cat b/foo
>> a
>
> That's because -i is equivalent to --reply=query (as mentioned in --help),
> and since you specify --reply=no after -i,
>
On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 18:12, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Bryce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > there's a sub annoyance that I was trying to handle regarding RHAT's
> > AS2.1 kernels which is a kernel limitation regarding reads and FS types
> > that did or did not support O_DIRECT.
>
> In this case, co
Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With coreutils-5.2.1, I see unexpected behaviour with mv -i
> --reply=no:
>
> $ rm -rf x
> $ mkdir -p x/a x/b
> $ cd x
> $ echo a > a/foo
> $ echo b > b/foo
> $ mv -i --reply=no a/foo b/foo
> $ cat b/foo
> a
That's because -i is equivalent to --reply=query (a
On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 20:28, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Assuming Jim Meyering like the idea of adding O_DIRECT support to
> > cp/mv, the next thing is to see how that might be done.
>
> I'm inclined to support it, based on Philip's anecdote about
> `cp' being
With coreutils-5.2.1, I see unexpected behaviour with mv -i
--reply=no:
$ rm -rf x
$ mkdir -p x/a x/b
$ cd x
$ echo a > a/foo
$ echo b > b/foo
$ mv -i --reply=no a/foo b/foo
$ cat b/foo
a
First reported at:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120742
Tim.
*/
pgp0.pgp
Descri
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Following up on my previous email, here's a proposed performance patch
> for coreutils. I can't measure any performance improvements on my
> host, but I suspect that aligning I/O buffers can make a real
> difference with some device drivers on some hosts, a
Bauke Jan Douma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think there's no justification (pun intended) for the current
> right-justification of uid's/gid's -- it really looks ugly.
In some cases it looks better, in some cases it looks worse.
Here's an example where it looks better:
$ old-ls -l a b c
