From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Nov 12 21:19:48 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A59C16A4CE
	for <standards@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:19:48 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mailout2.pacific.net.au (mailout2.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.85])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF4C43D2F
	for <standards@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:19:47 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (mailproxy2.pacific.net.au
	[61.8.0.87])iACLJaKP009397;	Sat, 13 Nov 2004 08:19:36 +1100
Received: from epsplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	iACLJYxc021963;	Sat, 13 Nov 2004 08:19:35 +1100
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 08:19:35 +1100 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@epsplex.bde.org
To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <200411121909.iACJ9o5t093134@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <20041113081837.D4041@epsplex.bde.org>
References: <E6821B92-34DC-11D9-893C-000393DACFAC@brierdr.com>
 <200411121909.iACJ9o5t093134@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: standards@freebsd.org
cc: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@brierdr.com>
Subject: Re: Any objections to the following?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Standards compliance <freebsd-standards.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>,
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-standards>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-standards@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>,
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:19:48 -0000

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> <<On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:58:54 -0800, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@brierdr.com> said:
>
> > This allows:
>
> > 	rm -rf ""
>
> > To behave the same as:
>
> > 	rm -f ""
>
> > Which is to say that no diagnostic will be emitted if you're forcing
> > the operation (and ignoring errors).
>
> According to the Standard, only [ENOENT] diagnostics should be
> suppressed.

Fortunately the errno for rm -rf "" is ENOENT, so the patch needs only
a small fix.

Bruce