From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 4 16:48:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28C016A4CF; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:48:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8110743D41; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:48:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id 431E5530A; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:48:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id 51A3E5313; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:48:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 2DF19B861; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:48:24 +0200 (CEST) To: "M. Warner Losh" References: <200410041126.i94BQ273055417@repoman.freebsd.org> <20041004.103638.70543632.imp@bsdimp.com> From: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 18:48:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20041004.103638.70543632.imp@bsdimp.com> (M. Warner Losh's message of "Mon, 04 Oct 2004 10:36:38 -0600 (MDT)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.64 cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/rm rm.1 rm.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 16:48:31 -0000 "M. Warner Losh" writes: > I contend that this change is technically flawed. While it is allowed > by the standards, I believe we should exit entirely when we hit this > 'third rail' rather than just ignoring the offending arg. If it is > there as a sanity check, and you hit it, you can't assume that the > rest of the arguments are sane at all. This is fundamentally > different than the '.' checks, which do remove the bad args from the > list and aren't likely the results of an error. I don't personally object to the behaviour you propose, but it is not what will be in the standard. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no