From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 10 7:59:27 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from icomag.de (ns.icomag.de [195.227.115.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9F7737B416 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (bgd@localhost) by icomag.de (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g3AEvWF82877; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 16:57:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from bgd@icomag.de) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 16:57:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Bogdan TARU X-X-Sender: To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Subject: Re: 'rm' incompatibility with Posix.2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020410164921.U82564-100000@fw.cgn.icom> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG UUps... :) Sorry, OpenBSD and NetBSD (typing fast & wrong, that's what I'm good at). Could you also try the NetBDS's 'rm'? If it does work like FreeBDS, than I really don't know what to believe anymore. bogdan On 10 Apr 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Bogdan TARU writes: > > On 10 Apr 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > In my humble opinion, Solaris (and every other *nix) is broken in this > > > respect, and *BSD is correct. > > Except for OpenBDS. No NetBDS machine available, maybe some of you could > > try it on one as well? > > I don't know of any "OpenBDS" or "NetBDS", but NetBSD has the same > semantics as FreeBSD: > > des@rc4 ~% mkdir foo > des@rc4 ~% touch foo/bar > des@rc4 ~% ln -s foo baz > des@rc4 ~% ls -l baz > lrwxr-xr-x 1 des des 3 Apr 10 16:41 baz@ -> foo > des@rc4 ~% ls -l baz/ > total 0 > -rw-r--r-- 1 des des 0 Apr 10 16:41 bar > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message