Re: BTRFS file clone support for cp

[Andi Kleen]

Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>
> Thanks.  I haven't looked, but after reading about the reflink syscall
> [http://lwn.net/Articles/332802/] had come to the same conclusion:
> this feature belongs with ln rather than with cp.

cp already has -l so it would make sense to extend that too.

> Besides, putting the new behavior on a new option avoids
> the current semantic change we would otherwise induce in cp.

I don't see how semantics change in a user visible way.

-Andi

-- 
address@hidden -- Speaking for myself only.