From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 27 11:55:05 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7E516A46C for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:55:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daichi@freebsd.org) Received: from natial.ongs.co.jp (natial.ongs.co.jp [202.216.232.58]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD0913C4BE for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:55:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daichi@freebsd.org) Received: from parancell.ongs.co.jp (dullmdaler.ongs.co.jp [202.216.232.62]) by natial.ongs.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id F08A3244C48; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:55:03 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <46FB9A17.2000201@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:55:03 +0900 From: Daichi GOTO User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070803) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brooks Davis References: <46F905FD.9060208@freebsd.org> <20070925184318.GC78038@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <20070925184318.GC78038@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Current , Masanori OZAWA Subject: Re: The safety expansion for FreeBSD rm(1) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:55:05 -0000 Brooks Davis wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 09:58:37PM +0900, Daichi GOTO wrote: >> Hi Guys again >> >> Today is not unionfs. Introduction for safety expansion of rm(1). >> I know that some unix folks have a experience that you remove some >> files or directories accidentally. Yes, me too. LoL >> >> Have you any dreams that rm(1) autonomously judges target should >> be remove or not? To complexify system base command is objectionable >> behavior but adding some little and simple mechanism to prevent a >> issue is acceptable I suppose. >> >> We have created safety expansion for rm(1). If you have any interests, >> please try follow patch. >> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/safety-rm/ >> >> Thanks :) > > This seems like an interesting extension of rm(1) in a fairly harmless manner. Yes, that's what it is :) > It seems like a fairly logical extension of the tcsh rmstar variable. The > one concern I would have with it is that unlike the rmstar variable, it would > always run even if the rm command is run in a script. > > What do you think of adding a flag to enable this behavior so users > could make rm an alias that uses the flag? That would keep it from > effecting scripts. Great! Exactly my point. We have gotten a discussion that to add an option like that or not. Yeah, we'll add an option you pointed. What is a best alphabet as option charactor do you think? -s (means safety remove)?? -e (means rm expansion)?? Is -s better?? > -- Brooks -- Daichi GOTO, http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi