Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Dec 2002 05:51:15 -0800
From:      David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU>
To:        Andrew Cutler <andrew@1stelement.com>
Cc:        setantae@submonkey.net, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: chown  broken??
Message-ID:  <20021220135115.GA38907@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <1040391396.921.43.camel@localhost>
References:  <1040390551.921.36.camel@localhost> <20021220132634.GA6498@submonkey.net> <1040391396.921.43.camel@localhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Andrew Cutler <andrew@1stelement.com>:
> I realise that now, but why does chown not ignore the match since most
> other commands simply return?
>         . is a directory -- ignored
>         .. is a directory -- ignored
> 
> This inconsistency is not logical.

rm makes a special case for '.' and '..' specifically to avoid
this kind of foot-shooting.  It gets away with it because it
doesn't make much sense to remove your current directory, much
less its parent.  Unfortunately, you can't really do the same
thing for chown because people sometimes do say 'chown -R foo .'
and really mean it.  Since the '.*' is expanded by the shell,
chown has no way of knowing what was really meant.  (BTW, the
example I gave shows you how to do what you were trying to do,
without the problems you ran into.)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021220135115.GA38907>