Talk:XCOPY

The contents of the XCOPY deployment page were merged into XCOPY on 18 January 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter. Microsoft Windows: Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

xcopy was also a GUI based disk duplication program for the earlier Amiga Systems. It allowed the copy of non standard amiga formatted disks and got around a lot of copy protection people put on their games.

i have found something about it in Amiga support and maintenance software if thats any help but i do remember x-copy being a amiga program that also had a virus checker on it for the nasty amiga virues that where out 82.24.174.20 (talk) 00:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about XCOPY installation? Should that go here, or in Visual Studio, or what? --Uncle Ed 17:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "copyit.bat" appears to have been copied from this microsoft web site, I am removing it:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/xcopy.mspx?mfr=true

Concavelenz 18:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a not a manual. I've removed this again (along with the output of "help xcopy" on the talk page, which was borderline copyvio). Articles should describe their subjects, not explain how to use them. Chris Cunningham 11:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Command Options section shows a history of the different commands, at which point they were implemented and describes them. It is not a howto. Your removal of this section lessens the value of this article in my opinion.

Also you've removed the usage format. That's like cutting out the formula E=MC² from Einstein's theory of relativity. Showing the usage format of any command line program like this is essential for reference. It is not howto. I suggest this be restored as well. NipponBill 01:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same arguments could be used for basically any howto section which wasn't overtly prescriptive. It's possible to describe how a program works without a sprawling list of the arguments it takes; have a look at

chdir, for instance. Chris Cunningham 09:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Perhaps you could explain how how the historical reference and usage fit into the

howto concept. According to the How-to page: "A how-to' or a howto is an informal, often short, description of how to accomplish some specific task." NipponBill 09:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

My apologies. I'm referring to

template:howto when I say "howto", not to the concept. The "historical reference" you talk about is a rather obtuse way of describing the notes that certain flags aren't available on certain OS releases; as I said, I wouldn't have a problem with this being presented as an actual history section, but there's no need to keep a list of usage flags. Wikipedia is not a manual, and describing what each function does is what a manual is for. We wouldn't lose anything by adding a reference to a Microsoft site which contained this information instead of providing it ourselves. Chris Cunningham 10:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Regardless, it's still not a how-to or a manual to show the usage format.

Would you be able to suggest a way that we could construct a historical section, perhaps re-purposing some of the information you removed, in a way that would be acceptable? NipponBill 01:41, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A usage format is only useful when one needs to use the program, and it's basically just a copy of the program output. I've still got the page on my watchlist; I'll see what I can do in readding the historical info. Chris Cunningham 13:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any plans to actually put the historical information back? Some of us actually think stuff like that belongs in Wikipedia. 76.252.171.154 (talk) 07:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Realise this is a 10yr old post, but it is obviously still in use and it appears the issues above have not been resolved and formally closed. That said:

Can I suggest NipponBill & Chris Cunningham that for the consumer use purpose only, the information Chris Cunningham has provided, is left. However, Chris Cunningham perhaps you could reveiw your content and ensure the detail you provide does in fact address the readers in a "not so howto" way. NOTE: Primarily, this is not to clarify 'this is not a howto' but more to ensure the reader is not confused into thinking it is a 'howto' due to the style of writing. The last thing we want to do here is have readers assuming this is a howto of sorts and using the information in this way. And finally to the point of NipponBill, perhaps you could come up with a caveat or warning sign (perhaps like a sticker) that can be used on the pages for all commands and other like definitions. The 'warning this is not a howto' sticker, could then be displayed at the top of any command Wiki by anyone. That way, the audience is quite clear before they start reading, that the detail in this Wiki should NOT be read as an instruction demonstrating 'howto' use the command, but rather a guide to some of the many variations of the command itself. A link at the end that takes the reader to where the actual 'howto' instructions can be found, would also be useful. As I said at the start, this is only a suggestion. Thanks for your contributions tho, they are most valuable to readers :) Owl Empoir (talk) 18:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unix/*nix programs (Also sometimes used in Windows versions)

• cp -- copy files; can concatenate files
• cpio -- copy an entire directory structure from one place to another
• cat -- concatenate and display files
• dd -- copy streams, files, or devices in whole or part
• head -- display/copy the first part of a file
• tail -- display/copy the last part of a file

DOS/Windows programs (Seldom used in *nix versions)

• COPY -- copy files or sets of files, binary or text mode, can concatenate files
• XCOPY -- eXtended version of COPY, for copying file structures
• XXCOPY -- further extended commercial program
• ROBOCOPY -- further extended version, included in Vista

Other specialized programs are used to split large files into pieces and then put the pieces back together.

There are no good standard programs to extract an arbitrary piece of a file into another file. dd can be used, but requires setting blocksize to 1, which is very inefficient. In Windows, the obscure program CPART can be used.

grep and awk are powerful *nix programs for looking for patterns in a file. -69.87.200.198 00:36, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article has no footnotes and is not expansive enough to exist as standalone, but might work as a subtopic of XCOPY Ethanpet113 (talk) 02:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 11:10, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]