If possible, RoyCrowder's solution is preferable so there is no file to synchronize. Without being sure the rest of the data meets the same restrictions, though, we can't tell if it does do the right thing.
Either way, I would hope that this is a one-time conversion and not something that has to be repeated. Hopefully if there's an ongoing process that produces these files it will in the future just output them in the new naming scheme rather than requiring repeated conversions.
As you say, it could be really helpful to know more about the situation.
In reply to Re^4: rename files
by mr_mischief
in thread rename files
by pbaumgar
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |