On Saturday 02 October 2004 13:22, Ceri Davies wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 11:23:52AM +0200, Max Laier wrote: > > [ Sorry to be so negative ... ] > > > > At very least you should consider to error out silently as POSIX requires > > "-f" to be silent. Other than that you should really look into the > > standards and what they way about rm and friends. > > Are you sure? From the RATIONALE section of > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/rm.html: > > "It is less clear that error messages regarding files that cannot be > unlinked (removed) should be suppressed. Although this is historical > practice, this volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 does not permit the -f > option to suppress such messages."
Misread - I stand corrected. > > I am not a fan of providing seat belts like this. People concerned about > > this, can "alias rm 'rm -i'" etc. etc. Others have commented like this > > ... > > > > If you still have to make this change, make it tuneable with a > > environment variable (and make it default to off). > > I'd prefer that too. > > Ceri -- /"\ Best regards, | [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News
pgpjABLpwRosR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
