From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 31 00:14:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19B7416A407 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 00:14:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fcash@ocis.net) Received: from smtp.sd73.bc.ca (smtp.sd73.bc.ca [142.24.13.140]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E8F43D45 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 00:14:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fcash@ocis.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.sd73.bc.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1688A0050 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:14:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.sd73.bc.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.sd73.bc.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 26682-04 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:14:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from s10.sbo (s10.sbo [192.168.0.10]) by smtp.sd73.bc.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28988A0071 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:14:03 -0800 (PST) From: Freddie Cash To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:13:59 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <20061029222847.GA68272@marvin.astase.com> <45466902.5090603@FreeBSD.org> <17734.27601.79021.873705@bhuda.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <17734.27601.79021.873705@bhuda.mired.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200610301613.59298.fcash@ocis.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at sd73.bc.ca Subject: Re: [patch] rm can have undesired side-effects X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 00:14:11 -0000 On Monday 30 October 2006 01:17 pm, Mike Meyer wrote: > In <45466902.5090603@FreeBSD.org>, Doug Barton typed: > > Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > > > Personally I think rm should do what you ask it to do - if you ask > > > it to overwrite a file which has multiple links, well... though > > > luck. > > > > It's all well and good to say, "tough luck," but I don't think that's > > what our users expect. > > I'm a user. It's what I expect. If I wanted an OS that protected me > from myself, I wouldn't be running Unix. Please give me the rope I > need to get the job done. If that happens to be enough that I can hang > myself, and I sometimes do - well, I got what I asked for. When I want > to be coddled, I'll run a different OS. Isn't that what the -f option is for in every command? By default, be conservative in what you do (error out with nice messages when in doubt). If the user knows what they are doing then let them specify -f. -- Freddie Cash fcash@ocis.net