B20: mv deletes files on error (NT)
Mon Mar 29 16:19:00 GMT 1999
"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote:
> Well, let's flip the question. Why is it not adequate to modify "ln" to
> handle the issue of hard links? This is not without precedent since it had
> to be done at one time for file systems that don't support hard links (like
> Whether or not foo and Foo are the same file, I see no reason why one can't
> rename it in a case-sensitive manner. I can in the Explorer. I can using
> DOS commands (like MOVE). Why shouldn't I be able to keep doing this in
> Cygwin? Why does the change to support hard links necessitate a change in
> Cygwin where support for "mv" does not? Mind you, I'm not arguing that
> the support for hard links is bad but merely that the change made to support
> them may not be the best approach to getting them! Is there anyone who can
> clarify that point? The rest is just opinion, which while great for
> discussion, usually wears thin after a time.
Sorry, but I don't understand your intention.
- cygwin has supported hard links earlier already.
- `ln' supported hard links earlier, too.
- The change, I made, didn't invent hard link support, but the ability,
to recognize them. It uses the type of i-node number, which is generated
by windows itself. Moreover the filename hashing method was never correctly
implemented, because it was case sensitive, which did never reflect the
file system behaviour.
- Shouldn't be the behaviour of mv corrected, instead of working incorrect
in an inner part of the system? Wouldn't this be a more future oriented
BTW: `mv' did never work correctly on files which ends up in `.exe'. Try:
mv foo foo.exe <-- this works
mv foo.exe foo <-- this not:
`mv: `ln.exe' and `ln' are the same file'
- As mentioned by Earnie: Changing `mv' is really simple (a type of a one liner).
- In the meantime, try `mv foo bar; mv bar Foo'. ;)
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More information about the Cygwin