As for protecting against "rm -rf / foo" as a typo for "rm -rf /foo", I don't mind if we offer protection against that; but I see no reason at all to "protect" root from "rm -rf /". It's fair to say that somebody who types that means it, and it's fair to go as far as we can in satisfying it.
I think you just nailed it on the head right here... if you say "rm -rf /" you probably mean it, but if you say "rm -rf / foo" you probably oopsed (pretty good bet, since rm / makes asking to rm foo redundant). How about checking if there is more than one argument, and if one of those arguments is "/", fail. If there is only one argument, even if it is "/", assume the user knows what he is doing and proceed normally.
Why not let -i override -f? Then the usual alias bit works fine for those who want it. For times when you really want the -f, you can type /bin/rm -rf. Or `which rm` -rf. Or put it in a shell script and call it rmf.
There are a lot of ways to skin this properly without resorting to hacks making the tool smarter than the user.
Sam
_______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
