Erase the source file open; specify a tempfile name option

[Wayne Davison]

On Sat, 19 May 2001, Markus Friedl wrote:
> i'm not sure about this. should we really modify scp?
> i'd prefer to have a minimal diff between scp.c and rcp.c

I need help understanding this.  Adding useful options to a utility
certainly makes it more complex, but it also makes it more useful.
While you certainly want to make it easy to switch from rcp to scp, I
don't see why having more functionality than rcp available to use is a
bad thing.

For me, the ability to move multiple files from system to system over
the Internet is vital.  The only other secure way I know of to move
multiple files from system to system is to use something like expect
with sftp or to use scp and follow that up with an ssh "rm" (but
error-handling such a kludge is very annoying).

As mentioned previously, I could easily see the move functionality being
separated into a new utility (smv, I presume) rather than being an
option to scp.

..wayne..