new expected behavior? src/bin/rm/rm.c

George Georgalis george at
Thu Jun 2 19:23:51 PDT 2005

Per the "dumb user fix" in rm...

Is this expected behavior? ie I said fork a rm -rf, I really mean it...
but I had to ^Z, fg, bg...

roxy# rm -rf /usr/home/geo &
[1] 11174
roxy# recursively remove /usr/home/geo? y
y: Command not found.
[1]  + Suspended (tty input)         rm -I -rf /usr/home/geo
roxy# fg
rm -I -rf /usr/home/geo
roxy# bg
[1]    rm -I -rf /usr/home/geo &
[1]  + Suspended (tty input)         rm -I -rf /usr/home/geo

actually I'm not completely sure what was going on with the fd there.

shouldn't -f override -I as well as -i? If we are using -I, we can use
-f, or not, right?

// George

George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE cell:646-331-2027 mailto:george at xxxxxxxxx

More information about the Bugs mailing list