Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 12:00:57 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net, imp@village.org Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, dynamo@ime.net, security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Not sure if you got it... Message-ID: <199908310200.MAA01906@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I'd also like to have a new flag to rm. -F. One -F will be >> chflags nouflags foo ; rm -f foo >> while two -F will be >> chflags 0 foo ; rm -f foo > >I have a problem with this, it means updating 1 more chunk of code >should the set of items in uflags change. Interesting point. Support for removing user flags has already rotted in rm. The UF_NOUNLINK flag was added on 1997/06/02 but rm -rf still doesn't clear it. Support for the nounlnk flags is also broken in chflags and ls. The flags are negative logic, like UF_NODUMP, and this is consistently handled backwards (nodump was only backwards in the manpage). Thus you have to say `chflags uunlnk ...' to set the _NO_ uunlnk flag, and ls tells you that the uunlnk flag is set despite there being no such flag. The abbreviation uunlink as uunlnk doesn't help. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908310200.MAA01906>