* src/rm.c (usage): Update wording to make two points more
apparent: undelete is not trivial, and partial recovery should be
a consideration factor in deciding whether rm is secure enough.
Initially suggested by Reuben Thomas.
---
On 03/12/2010 04:37 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> Just to check before I go to the trouble of getting patch out, are we
> happy with:
>
> Note that if you use rm to remove a file, it might be possible to
> recover some of its contents, given sufficient expertise and/or
> time. For greater assurance that the file is truly unrecoverable,
> consider using shred.
Here it is in patch form. I'll commit it tomorrow unless there are
further suggestions today.
src/rm.c | 6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/rm.c b/src/rm.c
index d9a1f8b..42f0a57 100644
--- a/src/rm.c
+++ b/src/rm.c
@@ -176,9 +176,9 @@ use one of these commands:\n\
program_name, program_name);
fputs (_("\
\n\
-Note that if you use rm to remove a file, it is usually possible to recover\n\
-the contents of that file. If you want more assurance that the contents are\n\
-truly unrecoverable, consider using shred.\n\
+Note that if you use rm to remove a file, it might be possible to recover\n\
+some of its contents, given sufficient expertise and/or time. For greater\n\
+assurance that the contents are truly unrecoverable, consider using shred.\n\
"), stdout);
emit_ancillary_info ();
}
--
1.6.6.1
