Re: XXCOPY question

On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:39:06 -0400, J. Y. wrote:

[XXCopy switches]
>   It's not clear why the /Y switch is connected to this problem. the /Y switch
> is defined as follows:
>
>       /Y  Overwrites existing files without prompt
>
>   My problem is displaying the names of files that are copied when I don't
> want them to be displayed.
>
>   You are correct that trying to copy a file on top of an existing file will
> produce an "overwrite?" message without the /y switch.

I can't tell you more about the reasoning of Kan Yabumoto behind the
functionality of these switches apart from the info I linked to in my
previous post. I don't like it either, but this behavior exists for a
couple of years by now and adding the /Y switch always helped.

Another workaround is redirecting the console to the NUL device. In
your example this would be:

xxcopy "e:\editors\*.*" "j:\editors\" /er/k/a0/q3/zs > NUL

If the program needs to acquire additional information (e.g. it prompts
you whether to overwrite a file), it may seem to hang without notice
until you press an appropriate key. So you should only use this in a
well tested environment. In a batch you could add something like:

@echo Press 'a' if the program doesn't respond for a couple of seconds!

before the xxcopy call. Nevertheless, this setup is no less dangerous
than adding the /Y switch. Maybe you ask Kan Yabumoto to rework the
/Q3 switch, if you can't live with the workarounds. Regarding all he
wrote about that switch I agree with your opinion that the /Q3 switch
*ought to* behave differently. (But it is not a matter of great concern
for me...)

BeAr
--
==========================================================================
= What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"?
===============================================================--(Oops!)==
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]