Bug 161615

Summary: mv --reply=no does not work as expected
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Hal Canary <halcanary>
Component: coreutilsAssignee: Tim Waugh <twaugh>
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: athlon   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-06-27 05:25:23 EDT Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:

Description Hal Canary 2005-06-24 16:26:47 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050524 Fedora/1.0.4-4 Firefox/1.0.4

Description of problem:
touch file1 file2
mv --reply=no file1 file2
ls file1 file2


mv should not overwrite file2.  It does.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
coreutils-5.2.1-48

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. touch file1 file2
2. mv --reply=no file1 file2
3. ls file1 file2
  

Actual Results:  /bin/ls: file1: No such file or directory
file2


Expected Results:  file1 file2

Additional info:
Comment 1 Hal Canary 2005-06-24 16:31:10 EDT
*** Bug 161616 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Tim Waugh 2005-06-24 16:48:42 EDT
Why would you expect that behaviour?  Omitting '--reply=no' would not cause a
prompt to reply to!
Comment 3 Hal Canary 2005-06-27 02:15:49 EDT
From "info coreutils mv":

"Specify `--reply=no' to make `mv' act as if `no' were given as a response to
every prompt about a destination file. "

$ touch file1 file2
$ mv --reply=query file1 file2
mv: overwrite `file2'? n

I have a script that renames files.  But I do not want this scipt to ever
clobber an existing file.  Right now, I do "mv --reply=query" or "mv -i" to keep
the existing file from being overwriten.  Then I manually type "n".  I want to
not have to type "n" each time.  

Acording to the man page, "--reply=no" should "specify how to handle the prompt
about an  existing destination file."  In other words: "No, I don't want to
overwrite that file."

Omitting '--reply=' would be equivilent to "--reply=yes"