Re: Order of files with 'cp'

"Matt Emmerton" <matt_at_gsicomp.on.ca> writes:

> > On Fri, 2005-Nov-18 15:50:53 +0100, Mario Hoerich wrote:
> > >This just adds a -o flag to cp, which preserves order.
> >
> > I think that's overkill.  IMHO, cp should just copy files in the order
> > specified on the command line (or directory order for recursive copies).
> > For most purposes, the order is irrelevant.  In cases where it is
> > relevant, the caller has a better idea of what order they want and can
> > juggle the command line to suit.
> 
> Hear hear!  The underlying change, while technically sound, breaks POLA -- 
> which should have been the first thing to consider when this change was
> suggested, and should have been rejected immediately on that ground alone.

I don't follow this point.  The existing behaviour was unpredictable,
so it's unlikely anybody was depending on it.  Therefore, the POLA
doesn't apply.  Can you explain what you mean?

> Why not revert to the "legacy" behaviour, and use the -o option for the
> "optimized" algorithm?

That would, nonetheless, be fine with me.