From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29052 invoked from network); 14 Oct 1998 17:50:17 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Oct 1998 17:50:17 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA04440; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:43:17 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:43:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199810141746.SAA26773@diamond.tao.co.uk> Subject: Re: v3.1.4 Files/mv bug To: phil@athenaeum.demon.co.uk (Phil Pennock) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:46:52 +0100 (BST) From: "Zefram" Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu In-Reply-To: <199810141738.SAA02973@athenaeum.demon.co.uk> from "Phil Pennock" at Oct 14, 98 06:38:23 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dBcSr3.0.G51.rAE9s"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/4432 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu Phil Pennock wrote: >So, just how POSIX-compliant is zsh aiming to be? What does POSIX >actually require, anyway? POSIX does require the historical behaviour of mv. However, as this mv can only be used by taking explicit action (loading/autoloading the module), I consider POSIX conformance to be less of an issue than it is for the shell itself. If someone wants to write a patch to add the copy/remove fallback to the builtin mv, I don't have a problem with putting it into the baseline; I just don't consider the current behaviour to be broken. > But, either the shell could do it >correctly or if the link(2) fails with EXDEV then automatically use the >one in the PATH. Ugly. There are a number of nasty issues here. >Alternatively, since they're both GPL'ed, just rip the code from the >FSF's GNU shell-utils or wherever mv(1) normally lives ... zsh is not GPLed, and it's written much more neatly than most GNU programs anyway. -zefram