From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 25 20:40:10 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CE316A418 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:40:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAEB13C448 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:40:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8PKckfp019304; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 22:38:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l8PKckmm019303; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 22:38:46 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 22:38:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <200709252038.l8PKckmm019303@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, fbsd-stable-0@ml.turing-complete.org In-Reply-To: <20070925190407.GA39037@mid.pc5.i.0x5.de> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-stable User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/6.2-STABLE-20070808 (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 22:38:54 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Subject: Re: rm(1) bug, possibly serious X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, fbsd-stable-0@ml.turing-complete.org List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:40:10 -0000 Nicolas Rachinsky wrote: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > By the way, an additional confusion is that ".." and "../" > > are handled differently. Specifying ".." always leads to > > this message: > > > > rm: "." and ".." may not be removed > > > > and nothing is actually removed. It is confusing that > > adding a slash leads to a different error message _and_ > > removal of the contents of the parent directory. Clearly > > a POLA violation. > > Adding a slash often leads to different behaviour. Yes, I'm aware of that. I often make use of the feature that "find /sys/" expands the symlink, while "find /sys" does not. The same holds true for ls(1). However, I would still argue that there is no sane reason for "rm -rf ../" behaving differently from "rm -rf ..", especially because it behaves differently in a destructive way. That's why I call it a POLA violation. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Python is executable pseudocode. Perl is executable line noise.