Timeline for cp vs. cat to copy a file
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 24, 2019 at 4:46 | comment | added | user309777 | Btw, GNU cp has an option for controlling its behavior on sparse files; like, with --sparse=never specified on the command line, cp is as slow as cat. | |
| Jan 30, 2012 at 15:47 | comment | added | Tatjana Heuser | Both tools operate on content, but cp (at least "modern" implementations) is aware of some specialities nowadays, like holes (old implementations of cat will run into that trap). There also are filesystems which are unaware of the concept of sparse files, for example HFS+ (MacOS) or FAT (MSDOS, USB-Sticks, etc), causing them to be blown up to their full size. So there are constellations where cp or cat won't make a difference in practice. | |
| Jan 30, 2012 at 15:35 | vote | accept | qyy | ||
| Jan 30, 2012 at 15:29 | comment | added | qyy | So cp makes a file just like the original, while cat creates a new file with the same content. | |
| Jan 30, 2012 at 15:03 | history | answered | Tatjana Heuser | CC BY-SA 3.0 |