Re: Concern about --reply=no option of mv.

[Philip Rowlands]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Dana Runge wrote:

> I noticed that the --reply option is being deprecated in mv.
>
> Perhaps I am overlooking something, but it appears as if key 
> functionality is being removed from the command.
>
> I regularly write scripts with --reply=no with the intent that if the 
> target file exists, the mv command fails. Neither of the recommended 
> replacements, -i, nor -f offer this functionality. Because these 
> scripts may be run from a cron job, I don't want to ask for user 
> input.
>
> The only option left, if --reply=no is removed, is to use
>
>    mv -i x y < /dev/null 2> /dev/null
>
> You tell me, is this clearer than
>
>    mv --reply=no x y
>
> I don't think so.

I think the problem was that mv would prompt in other circumstances than 
the example above, and that the option was being misunderstood. This 
thread has the discussion:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-06/msg00160.html

> If you insist on removing my beloved --reply=no, please replace it 
> with a new option that provides the same functionality, and please 
> provide several years, 3-4 at least, to allow the new command to 
> propagate through all the various Linux distributions that are out 
> there.

Will your cron-driven script have a terminal on stdin? The help text for 
--reply used to say at one point:

  --reply={yes,no,query}   specify how to handle the prompt about an
                           existing destination file.  Note that
                           --reply=no has an effect only when mv
                           would prompt without -i or equivalent, i.e.,
                           when a destination file exists and is not
                           writable, standard input is a terminal, and
                           no -f (or equivalent) option is specified

Other alternatives and examples are given in the abovementioned thread.


Cheers,
Phil