Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 11:54:01 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> To: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Protection from the dreaded "rm -fr /" Message-ID: <20041002085400.GB52519@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <20041002083336.GA10355@k7.mavetju> References: <20041002081928.GA21439@gothmog.gr> <20041002083336.GA10355@k7.mavetju>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2004-10-02 18:33, Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 11:19:28AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > John Beck, who works for Sun, has posted an entry in his blog yesterday > > about "rm -fr /" protection, which I liked a lot: > > http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/jbeck/20041001#rm_rf_protection > > > > His idea was remarkably simple, so I went ahead and wrote this patch for > > rm(1) of FreeBSD: > > I'm not so much worried about 'rm -rf /', but I'm more worried about > "rm -rf *" in my home directory. It happened once because I was too > happy switching directories before realising what I was doing in > the wrong directory. I can't do anything about that, I'm afraid. > Also, refusing to do it is not the ideal way to go, I think that > if you have two -f's specified it would do it anyway. Just my two > cents of course. My intuition tells me that there is practically no case where root would really like to rm -fr the root partition. There are other ways to clean up a disk that are much faster and less prone to accidents. But I can make it behave as it does now with a double -f option.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041002085400.GB52519>