Tom Rodman <cygwin <at> trodman.com> writes: > > I think I had read something years back about cygwin's inode > simulation (sorry to munge up the terminology), being imperfect; > so that may have convinced me to not use "rm -rf DIRXXX".
And how would imperfect inode simulation mess up rm? Seriously - I would like to know what gave you the impression that inode behavior could interfere with rm. > > So is "rm -rf ./foo/" safe to use? Is there any danger that > anything other than ./foo/ will be deleted? I use recursive rm all the time, both on FAT drives (where cygwin must do inode simulation) and on NTFS drives (where cygwin uses NTFS inodes). The only danger in deleting more than you intended is if you type the command wrong, but that same danger holds true for 'cmd /c rmdir'. IMO, if you are going to use cygwin, then use cygwin's rm (but maybe I'm biased, since I happen to be the rm maintainer). -- Eric Blake volunteer cygwin coreutils maintainer -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
