>
> On the other hand personally I just don't see the
> need for this since
> the @ char isn't special to the shell so I don't see
> where the original
> problem came from.
It is the combination of the fear of doing something bad and the the
consequence of doing that something bad that make people worry about this.
Especially when writing scripts.
I would much prefer to do
for snap in $(zfs list -t snapshot -r foo/bar )
do
zfs destroy -t snapshot $snap
do
the not have the -t. Especially the further away the destroy is from the
generation of the list. The extra -t would be belt and braces but that is how
I like my data protected.
Yes you can add that in using a shell function:
zfs_destroy_snapshot
{
zfs destroy [EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
}
but that is more hassle than a nice admin model should require from the nervous
user.
On the same basis that we don't need the -t option to destroy we don't really
need a separate snapshot sub command. It would be implied by:
zfs create tank/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yet this is not allowed and we have to have a special command to create a
snapshot but a generic one to destroy it.
--chris
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
