You can see it in the code, lstat vs stat and copy_special, copy_fifo vs copy_file. They're all in utils.c.
replyfrom the lstat man page:
The lstat() function is identical to stat() except when the named file is
a symbolic link, in which case lstat() returns information about the link
itself, not the file the link references.
$ tree test1
test1
|-- file.txt
`-- link.txt -> ../link.txt
0 directory, 2 files
$ cp -r test1 test2
$ tree test2
test2
|-- file.txt
`-- link.txt
0 directory, 2 files
$ cp -R test1 test3
$ tree test3
test3
|-- file.txt
`-- link.txt -> ../link.txt
0 directory, 2 files
$ cp -RL test1 test4
$ tree test4/
test4/
|-- file.txt
`-- link.txt
0 directory, 2 files> links to the source code but never actually says what it is.
replyThe snippet of code makes it very clear what the difference is, no?
flag_copy_as_regular = 1 VS flag_copy_as_regular = 0, where regular would be a "regular" and not "special" file.
Only clear to those with a heavy UNIX background-- I understood and correctly interpreted it on first read, but the concept of a "regular file" is a bit in the wonk territory for most users, though the implication on symbolic links is a very practical one that surely lead to the removal (in the implementations where it was removed) of this option, since its very surprising that copying a directory heirarchy would cause symbolic links to become copies of what they linked to, instead of remaining symbolic links in the resulting directory.
replyI have no idea what that means, or what the consequences would be for choosing one or the other.
replyNope. That variable name could mean anything
reply