Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 00:45:56 -0800 (PST) From: Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu> To: Studded <Studded@dal.net> Cc: FreeBSD-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Weirdness with rm Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980309004539.3844E-100000@gdi.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980308184902.5724A-100000@dt050ndd.san.rr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 8 Mar 1998, Studded wrote: > This is something I've always wondered about, but didn't have a > chance to ask. :) If I try to rm a file that I don't have permissions > for, rm first asks me if I want to override, then tells me that it can't > delete the file anyway. I realize that there are situations where rm does > override permissions, but it seems to me that if it can't override the > permissions anyway, the two checks are superfluous. > > Is there some reason that rm wouldn't do the "absolute" check > before it asks if I want to override the perms? Here is an example: > > 73$ rm *.DIST > override rw-r----- root/bin for rc.conf.5.DIST? y > rm: rc.conf.5.DIST: Permission denied Just to warn you, I guess? -f will quiet it. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major 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?Pine.BSF.3.96.980309004539.3844E-100000>