Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!msschaa
From: msschaa@cs.vu.nl (Schaap MS)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: 4dos misfeature?
Message-ID: <9241@star.cs.vu.nl>
Date: 7 Mar 91 16:10:33 GMT
References: <1991Mar6.192824.9889@en.ecn.purdue.edu> <H7Rey2w164w@halcyon.uucp> <1828@manta.NOSC.MIL>
Sender: news@cs.vu.nl
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Lines: 26

In article <1828@manta.NOSC.MIL> north@manta.NOSC.MIL (Mark H. North) writes:
>In article <H7Rey2w164w@halcyon.uucp> halcyon!ralphs@seattleu.edu (Ralph Sims) writes:
>>
>>Nope, use the move command for what is was intended, not as a replacement
>>for rename.
>>
>If the move command is not supposed to be used for this purpose the *polite*
>(read non-RUDE) thing for it to do us warn you of impending disaster not
>trash your disk. Jeesh.
>
>Mark


The 4dos move command IS supposed to be used for this purpose.

What it does is:

  - first, it tries to rename the file (even across directories).
  - if that doesn't work, it copies the file, then deletes the
      old one.

So, in this case, it should have worked. Why it didn't, I don't
know.

     Michael Schaap
     msschaa@cs.vu.nl