Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:14:01 +1100 From: Gregory Bond <gnb@itga.com.au> To: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> Cc: Manfred Lotz <manfred.lotz@web.de> Subject: Re: unexpected softupdate inconsistency Message-ID: <200403110014.LAA17110@lightning.itga.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:07:37 -0800.
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
oberman@es.net said: > emacs and XEmacs dired has been able to manipulate directories for as > ling as I've been around. I assume that they DO use the standard > system calls. (This includes vim, which I don't use.) True. I use dired a bit. There are also gui Windows Explorer or Norton Commander workalikes that also presumably use the same system calls. The key phrase here is "What does vim do here _that rm doesn't_?" If vim is also just using unlink() then rm can (theoretically) do the job just as well. It seems like really odd advice to say "use vim because rm can't do the job." If this were in any way true, then I'd call that a serious bug in rm.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200403110014.LAA17110>