Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!jade!eris!mwm
From: mwm@eris.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Cp: A replacement for AmigaDos Copy
Message-ID: <3762@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Thu, 28-May-87 19:08:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: jade.3762
Posted: Thu May 28 19:08:57 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 30-May-87 10:23:21 EDT
References: <741@van-bc.UUCP> <121@gtss.UUCP> <156@l5comp.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@jade.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mwm@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer)
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 31
Keywords: AmigaDos Copy Regular Expressions

In article <156@l5comp.UUCP> scotty@l5comp.UUCP (Scott Turner) writes:
<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.

You use copy to move a file? That's odd - I use rename. Copy makes a
new copy, rename moves the current one to a new name (or directory).

<If there is some reason for why a copy should be seen as 'newer' I'd love to
<hear about it.

I've already posted a couple; I'm not going to post them again.

A reasonable solution has already been proposed: have two programs,
one called copy creates new copies, and one called cp that creates
copies with preserved dates. "Copy" needs to have behavior identical
to the original DOS copy for script-writers, so the date-mangling one
winds up as "cp" (or "mv", or "backup", or whatever you want to call
it).

While I'm talking to you, let me add to requests that you tone the
excess verbiage (read: flames) in your postings. No matter how good a
tecnical point is, most people will ignore it (or just not bother
reading it) if it's 5% of an article that's 95% flameage.

	<mike
--
How many times do you have to fall			Mike Meyer
While people stand there gawking?			mwm@berkeley.edu
How many times do you have to fall			ucbvax!mwm
Before you end up walking?				mwm@ucbjade.BITNET