FS#11603 - [coreutils] FR: add -g option for cp and mv

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Andrea Scarpino (BaSh) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 01:25 GMT
Last edited by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 14:22 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description:
I saw '-g' option in copy and move commands in Gentoo.
I want to request the same feauture for own coreutils package.
I updated the gentoo patch for coreutils 6.12, then I added the patch to PKGBUILD and it works.

-g option add a progress bar like as wget style when copy or move files.

Additional info:
* coreutils 6.12-1


Tarball with updated PKGBUILD and patch:
   coreutils.tar.gz (150 KiB)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Roman Kyrylych (Romashka)
Sunday, 28 September 2008, 14:22 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Comment by Andrea Scarpino (BaSh) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 02:07 GMT
-g, --progress show a progress bar if operation is going to
take a long time
Comment by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 03:09 GMT
I think it would be better to file this bug upstream. If someone has already done so, there must be a reason why it has not been included. I think we should make sure that the upstream devs have a chance to look at this before we decide whether to patch our systems or not.
Comment by Loui Chang (louipc) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 08:41 GMT
Yep. You should send this to the coreutils developers.

I found this in that patch:

> Upstream has been contacted about this a few times ...
>
> they dont want progress bars in mv/cp:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2003-08/msg00114.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2003-09/msg00083.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2003-09/msg00084.html
>
> but they don't seem to mind a general util ... add this to future patchset:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2003-09/msg00101.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2004-02/msg00071.html
Comment by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 10:28 GMT
IMO, if they don't want this in mainline, leave it out for arch. Let's keep things minimal, I'm pretty sure the stated policy is to only patch when a major feature is broken, or if it needs patches to work with arch, and not to add new features. The AUR is there for things like this.
Comment by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 10:33 GMT
Just to be clear though, I think it might be OK to do the SIGUSR1 patch... Still not sure if it's the right way to go.

Loading...