new expected behavior? src/bin/rm/rm.c
Sascha Wildner
saw at online.de
Fri Jun 3 09:39:20 PDT 2005
Matthew Dillon wrote:
I've always considered -f to simply mean to have rm attempt to
override file perms. I didn't even realize that it overrides -i
until you mentioned it... that actually sounds like a mistake to me,
it shouldn't do both! I don't think we want -f to override -I. -I
is not meant to be treated the same as -i. -I is supposed to be a
non-intrusive 'smart' option.
Maybe we want -F to override -I. :)
Sascha
--
http://yoyodyne.ath.cx
More information about the Bugs
mailing list