On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 11:23:28PM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
> I'd do it like this instead, makes it clearer that we're
> dealing with one special case:
>
> if (remove(path) < 0) {
> if (!rm_fflag)
> weprintf("remove %s:", path);
> rm_status = !(rm_fflag && errno == ENOENT);
> }
>
> What do you think?That looks good to me.
