* On 4/8/23 18:40, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 4/7/23 12:48, mh@mike.franken.de wrote:
On Donnerstag, 6. April 2023 23:05:33 CEST Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 4/5/23 23:16, mh@mike.franken.de wrote:
On Montag, 3. April 2023 12:00:22 CEST Dominique Leuenberger wrote: This might break lots of Makefiles and other scripts.
I don't see why would this break many Makefiles. Usually they're not using -n, but rather either nothing or -f, don't they?
Using -f forces overwriting existing files, -n should preserve them, if they exist.
Sure, but I wouldn't know a place in Makefiles where the latter would be used.
Configuration files, which you want to provide in case they don't exist and not overwrite them in case they do, come to mind as a scenario. However, that naturally is only useful when not using a package manager (i.e., a pure install-from-source situation) and furthermore is easily replicated with a normal cp and a file existence test. It can also be used a poor-man's rsync alternative, if you know that the content of files didn't change, but want to synchronize two directories in a more efficient manner than just blindly overwriting and re-transfering all data. Mihai