Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!stride!l5comp!scotty From: scotty@l5comp.UUCP (Scott Turner) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Cp: A replacement for AmigaDos Copy Message-ID: <156@l5comp.UUCP> Date: Wed, 27-May-87 06:59:53 EDT Article-I.D.: l5comp.156 Posted: Wed May 27 06:59:53 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 30-May-87 06:43:16 EDT References: <741@van-bc.UUCP> <121@gtss.UUCP> Reply-To: scotty@l5comp.UUCP (Scott Turner) Organization: L5 Computing, Edmonds, WA Lines: 28 Keywords: AmigaDos Copy Regular Expressions Summary: Setting the date is a WHAT?!? In article <121@gtss.UUCP> chas@gtss.UUCP (Charles Cleveland) writes: >In article <741@van-bc.UUCP> jlydiatt@van-bc.UUCP (Jeff Lydiatt) writes: >> >>Here is a replacement for AmigaDog "copy" program.... >>It ... has the added bonus that it retains the date of copied file. > >This is not a feature, it is a bug :-). Virtually nobody does it this >way and for good reason. Kindly include this feature as an option only, and >not the default one at that. One man's bug is another man's feature. I for one am ALL in favor of having my datestamps left alone when I move files around. I find it a bloody nuisance having the datestamp changed everytime I move a file from one place to another. And for those that would argue that dates are not a good way of verifying if one file is newer than the other, I submit that in that case why not do away with them all together? And I don't consider and exact copy of another file to be 'newer' than the original. If I need to change the datestamp that's what I've got 'touch' for. If there is some reason for why a copy should be seen as 'newer' I'd love to hear about it. Scott Turner -- L5 Computing, the home of Merlin, Arthur, Excalibur and the CRAM. GEnie: JST | UUCP: stride!l5comp!scotty | 12311 Maplewood Ave; Edmonds WA 98020 If Motorola had wanted us to use BPTR's they'd have built in shifts on A regs [ BCPL? Just say *NO*! ] (I don't smoke, send flames to /dev/null)