robert_schmid@fourthgen.com ("Robert Schmid") writes:
> My question is - is this a desirable upgrade

Not to discourage you (or others) from thinking about things like
this, but I'd say "no" in this case, it's not desirable.

(1) it breaks the existing, long-understood usage of mv, which (a bit
too) briefly is "mv src dest".  you now have "mv src" which ... really
doesn't follow.  8-)

(2) there's no reason to do this in 'mv' when it's fairly easily
accomplished outside of mv to begin with.

(3) it seems ... wrong to have to teach 'mv' about locales to the
extent that it understands upper<->lower conversion, etc.  esp. since
'mv' is statically linked and a very critical, low-level program, it
seems unnecessary code bloat.



cgd