On 11/9/2018 11:10 AM, Aaron Digulla wrote:
To "emphasize the point": 1) I can do a 'cp -a a/dir1 b/' which works. Since they are on the same device, even hardlinks will be duplicated. 2) I can then follow-up with 'rmdir a/dir1', which also works (no warning like when removing a file):
rm a/file1 rm: remove write-protected regular empty file 'a/file1'?
I.e. the exact same actions 'mv' would do if I was copying between devices.
Err no. The actions have the same result but use different operations. To get to the backside of a house, I can go left and right (and even over the roof). Same result, different ways.
---- Except the copy+delete is exactly what 'mv' does when the target is on a different file system. I.e. it could transparently do the same operations when the user asks for a 'mv'. wouldn't be as efficient, but it would mv the read-only directory. Just can't move it directly. To me, that seems a bit strange...like if you make the dir read-only, then you have to use the inefficient form to move it, vs. moving it directly. But if I can't update the '..' entry, that would imply I couldn't rename the parent -- but I can. So why can I update '..' if I rename the parent, but not by moving the child? It seems not only a bit arbitrary, but also pointless, though you do have the "benefit"(?) of losing the original owners and time and date stamps of the directories and files below the top. There's also the fact that I can goto another platform cygwin on win, and rename the directory w/no problem: /tmp> mkdir a /tmp> mkdir a/dir1 /tmp> mkdir b /tmp> mv a/dir1 b/ /tmp> Why, on linux can I rmdir a/dir1, with no problem/warning (where 'dir1' is a read-only dir)? I'd think deleting should generate some permission denied message if only moving it generates one, no? Thanks for response...I guess I'm unhappy with the inconsistencies and arbitrariness. linda -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org