mv command is moving to the parent of the provided argument

up vote
0
down vote

favorite

Let's say I have a working directory:

/home/userID/workingDirectory

I type a mv command that will affect the parent directory of the current working directory and the working directory itself:

mv .* /tmp/someDirectory

When executed, the command moves the content of both directories /home/userID and /home/userID/workingDirectory because .* is a match of the .. link in the current directory.

So far so good.

But, what I don't understand is why the files and directories are moved to the parent of the argument?

The files appear inside /tmp instead of /tmp/someDirectory

Can anybody throw some light?

OS is Solaris.

Thanks

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

1

Don't have solaris at hand so cannot verify, but you create all structure at the destination, so in particular move content of the parent directory ../* to /tmp/someDirectory/../* which is /tmp/*.
â€“Â jimmij
Sep 22 at 3:28

Ah, so. When mv goes to the destination path; it's using the argument to recreate the directory structure. And, as the argument to recreate the structure has itself a ../* then it's being interpreted as: /tmp/someDirectory/../* which will point to /tmp because is using the .. link inside /tmp/someDirectory. Am I correct?
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 3:58

1

I'm not sure about that interpretation. Can you verify the expansion of the glob with something like echo .* /tmp/someDirectory?
â€“Â Sparhawk
Sep 22 at 4:18

I have access to the servers until monday haha... Posted the question here at home because it was bothering me all the way here.
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 4:35

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
0
down vote

favorite

Let's say I have a working directory:

/home/userID/workingDirectory

I type a mv command that will affect the parent directory of the current working directory and the working directory itself:

mv .* /tmp/someDirectory

When executed, the command moves the content of both directories /home/userID and /home/userID/workingDirectory because .* is a match of the .. link in the current directory.

So far so good.

But, what I don't understand is why the files and directories are moved to the parent of the argument?

The files appear inside /tmp instead of /tmp/someDirectory

Can anybody throw some light?

OS is Solaris.

Thanks

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

1

Don't have solaris at hand so cannot verify, but you create all structure at the destination, so in particular move content of the parent directory ../* to /tmp/someDirectory/../* which is /tmp/*.
â€“Â jimmij
Sep 22 at 3:28

Ah, so. When mv goes to the destination path; it's using the argument to recreate the directory structure. And, as the argument to recreate the structure has itself a ../* then it's being interpreted as: /tmp/someDirectory/../* which will point to /tmp because is using the .. link inside /tmp/someDirectory. Am I correct?
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 3:58

1

I'm not sure about that interpretation. Can you verify the expansion of the glob with something like echo .* /tmp/someDirectory?
â€“Â Sparhawk
Sep 22 at 4:18

I have access to the servers until monday haha... Posted the question here at home because it was bothering me all the way here.
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 4:35

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
0
down vote

favorite

Let's say I have a working directory:

/home/userID/workingDirectory

I type a mv command that will affect the parent directory of the current working directory and the working directory itself:

mv .* /tmp/someDirectory

When executed, the command moves the content of both directories /home/userID and /home/userID/workingDirectory because .* is a match of the .. link in the current directory.

So far so good.

But, what I don't understand is why the files and directories are moved to the parent of the argument?

The files appear inside /tmp instead of /tmp/someDirectory

Can anybody throw some light?

OS is Solaris.

Thanks

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

Let's say I have a working directory:

/home/userID/workingDirectory

I type a mv command that will affect the parent directory of the current working directory and the working directory itself:

mv .* /tmp/someDirectory

When executed, the command moves the content of both directories /home/userID and /home/userID/workingDirectory because .* is a match of the .. link in the current directory.

So far so good.

But, what I don't understand is why the files and directories are moved to the parent of the argument?

The files appear inside /tmp instead of /tmp/someDirectory

Can anybody throw some light?

OS is Solaris.

Thanks

command-line directory solaris mv

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

asked Sep 22 at 3:14

Aeross

1

Don't have solaris at hand so cannot verify, but you create all structure at the destination, so in particular move content of the parent directory ../* to /tmp/someDirectory/../* which is /tmp/*.
â€“Â jimmij
Sep 22 at 3:28

Ah, so. When mv goes to the destination path; it's using the argument to recreate the directory structure. And, as the argument to recreate the structure has itself a ../* then it's being interpreted as: /tmp/someDirectory/../* which will point to /tmp because is using the .. link inside /tmp/someDirectory. Am I correct?
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 3:58

1

I'm not sure about that interpretation. Can you verify the expansion of the glob with something like echo .* /tmp/someDirectory?
â€“Â Sparhawk
Sep 22 at 4:18

I have access to the servers until monday haha... Posted the question here at home because it was bothering me all the way here.
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 4:35

add a commentÂ |Â

1

Don't have solaris at hand so cannot verify, but you create all structure at the destination, so in particular move content of the parent directory ../* to /tmp/someDirectory/../* which is /tmp/*.
â€“Â jimmij
Sep 22 at 3:28

Ah, so. When mv goes to the destination path; it's using the argument to recreate the directory structure. And, as the argument to recreate the structure has itself a ../* then it's being interpreted as: /tmp/someDirectory/../* which will point to /tmp because is using the .. link inside /tmp/someDirectory. Am I correct?
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 3:58

1

I'm not sure about that interpretation. Can you verify the expansion of the glob with something like echo .* /tmp/someDirectory?
â€“Â Sparhawk
Sep 22 at 4:18

I have access to the servers until monday haha... Posted the question here at home because it was bothering me all the way here.
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 4:35

Don't have solaris at hand so cannot verify, but you create all structure at the destination, so in particular move content of the parent directory ../* to /tmp/someDirectory/../* which is /tmp/*.
â€“Â jimmij
Sep 22 at 3:28

Ah, so. When mv goes to the destination path; it's using the argument to recreate the directory structure. And, as the argument to recreate the structure has itself a ../* then it's being interpreted as: /tmp/someDirectory/../* which will point to /tmp because is using the .. link inside /tmp/someDirectory. Am I correct?
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 3:58

I'm not sure about that interpretation. Can you verify the expansion of the glob with something like echo .* /tmp/someDirectory?
â€“Â Sparhawk
Sep 22 at 4:18

I have access to the servers until monday haha... Posted the question here at home because it was bothering me all the way here.
â€“Â Aeross
Sep 22 at 4:35

add a commentÂ |Â

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
2
down vote

Because basically the system is doing the following when using .*.
renameat(AT_FDCWD, "../workingDirectory", AT_FDCWD, "/tmp/narf/../workingDirectory") Err#18 EXDEV
Thus it's moved to /tmp/workingDirectory instead of /tmp/narf

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

To be precise, given that the target is /tmp, the mv command probably first attempts your posted renameat() system call, which likely fails with errno set to EXDEV since /tmp is almost certainly on a different file system. The mv command will then copy the file(s), and if successful delete the original(s).
â€“Â Andrew Henle
Sep 23 at 22:21

Obviously. Otherwise it wouldn't throw the EXDEV. But it shows the directory string with the ".."
â€“Â c0t0d0s0
Sep 24 at 2:47

add a commentÂ |Â

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);

);

draft saved

draft discarded

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470653%2fmv-command-is-moving-to-the-parent-of-the-provided-argument%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
2
down vote

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

To be precise, given that the target is /tmp, the mv command probably first attempts your posted renameat() system call, which likely fails with errno set to EXDEV since /tmp is almost certainly on a different file system. The mv command will then copy the file(s), and if successful delete the original(s).
â€“Â Andrew Henle
Sep 23 at 22:21

Obviously. Otherwise it wouldn't throw the EXDEV. But it shows the directory string with the ".."
â€“Â c0t0d0s0
Sep 24 at 2:47

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
2
down vote

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

To be precise, given that the target is /tmp, the mv command probably first attempts your posted renameat() system call, which likely fails with errno set to EXDEV since /tmp is almost certainly on a different file system. The mv command will then copy the file(s), and if successful delete the original(s).
â€“Â Andrew Henle
Sep 23 at 22:21

Obviously. Otherwise it wouldn't throw the EXDEV. But it shows the directory string with the ".."
â€“Â c0t0d0s0
Sep 24 at 2:47

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
2
down vote

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

answered Sep 22 at 21:22

c0t0d0s0

1262

To be precise, given that the target is /tmp, the mv command probably first attempts your posted renameat() system call, which likely fails with errno set to EXDEV since /tmp is almost certainly on a different file system. The mv command will then copy the file(s), and if successful delete the original(s).
â€“Â Andrew Henle
Sep 23 at 22:21

Obviously. Otherwise it wouldn't throw the EXDEV. But it shows the directory string with the ".."
â€“Â c0t0d0s0
Sep 24 at 2:47

add a commentÂ |Â

To be precise, given that the target is /tmp, the mv command probably first attempts your posted renameat() system call, which likely fails with errno set to EXDEV since /tmp is almost certainly on a different file system. The mv command will then copy the file(s), and if successful delete the original(s).
â€“Â Andrew Henle
Sep 23 at 22:21

Obviously. Otherwise it wouldn't throw the EXDEV. But it shows the directory string with the ".."
â€“Â c0t0d0s0
Sep 24 at 2:47

To be precise, given that the target is /tmp, the mv command probably first attempts your posted renameat() system call, which likely fails with errno set to EXDEV since /tmp is almost certainly on a different file system. The mv command will then copy the file(s), and if successful delete the original(s).
â€“Â Andrew Henle
Sep 23 at 22:21

Obviously. Otherwise it wouldn't throw the EXDEV. But it shows the directory string with the ".."
â€“Â c0t0d0s0
Sep 24 at 2:47

add a commentÂ |Â

draft saved

draft discarded

draft saved

draft discarded

Post as a guest

Name

MASna49,2pD3phlp QkpY8d1xmX18mklUatta0QnhY6 Jil icZ4wZf7SwPVdCy,KGY3qzJpjwhutpKr37re

搜尋此網誌

mjhjmtu