Does anyone know why cp always prompts me to overwrite files. According to the man file, -i is for prompting.

I'm using:
Linux lnxapp 2.6.23.15-80.fc7 #1 SMP Sun Feb 10 17:29:10 EST 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux

I've noticed that also. Specifically when I'm root. I just did a little test to verify that if I'm not root I do not get prompted.
Not an explanation just an observation.

Thanks for the quick response.
Never noticed that, but that is the same for me. With a normal user, no prompt, with root, it always prompts.

Is there a parameter for root to not prompt then?

This is a security measure for the root account, given its godly powers over your machine.

Take a look inside root's .bashrc file. You should find an alias to cp that includes the -i option. Remark that line to make cp operate like a normal user.

Perfect! Thanks Slowcoder!

I can see why they do it now for root. Maybe I'm thinking cp, rm, & mv should prompt by default and have a parameter to skip the prompt. Seems to make more sense that way.

Yep, but they don't by default. Even if they did, the aliases in root's .bashrc forcibly cause the commands to question your actions, no matter what options you send to the commands. Not as important for normal users, as all they can mess with are things they have permissions to.

On another note, the aliases allow you to change the default behavior of any commands. So, if you've got a certain command that you're always setting parameters on, you can give it an alias. The name of the alias itself does not have to be the same as the command itself.

For instance, would give allow you to issue "cpi" as a command that runs "cp -i -v".

Just another way Linux rocks!

Im not no expert at linux but check your alias, your cp might be set to cp -i in the alias and if you wish, you would change that warning but i dont see why anyone would want to change it considering the mess you would be if you were to delete something by invoking the wrong command .. ha.

Just like rm is probably set to rm -i as well.

I think it's a bad thing - what if you happen to get
access to a box that (for whatever reason!) doesn't
have that alias defined?

There's nothing that should replace your sanchin when
dealing with anything as root; particularly not aliases
that lull you into a false sense of safety.



Cheers,
Tink

I agree it's a bad thing that the default is to auto-overwrite/delete without confirmation. I was saying that it would be logical thinking that a command would operate with effectively the same behavior no matter what account it is executed with. So, being that it doesn't require confirmation as normal user, one might assume the same as root.

I rather think it could be a good idea to place the aliases in normal user's .bashrc files, except that (I believe) the -i overrides the -f, so would render -f nonfunctional. So, I suppose maybe the best solution would be to recompile cp/rm/mv so that -i is default.

P.S. What's a 'sanchin'?

Term from bushido. I've been taught that it literally translates
to "three battles", and that it means a state of alertness, hightened
awareness. It's a stance in Karate, and also the name of a kata.


Cheers,
Tink