From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Jan 27 08:08:26 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA02724 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:08:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pooh.elsevier.nl (pooh.elsevier.nl [145.36.9.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA02713 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:08:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steveo@iol.ie) Received: from pooh.elsevier.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pooh.elsevier.nl (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id QAA68544 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 16:07:15 GMT (envelope-from steveo@iol.ie) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <199901271549.HAA26208@cwsys.cwsent.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 16:07:13 -0000 (GMT) From: "Steve O'Hara-Smith" To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rm with no arguments... Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 27-Jan-99 Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote: > To add to this, Solaris, DEC UNIX and RedHat do not warn when "rm -f" > is entered. Not quite so simple Solaris 2.4 warns on rm -f Solaris 2.6 does not Solaris 2.6 man page talks about xpg4 whereas the 2.4 man page makes no mention of xpg4. However that man page also states that historical Solaris behaviour is the norm and xpg4 compliance is in /usr/xpg4/bin so I suspect this is a red herring. ---------------------------------- E-Mail: Steve O'Hara-Smith Date: 27-Jan-99 Time: 16:01:08 This message was sent by XFMail ---------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message