rm -rf and recursive nothing

[Jonas Trollvik]

On 7/22/06, Peter Avalos <pavalos at xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 03:36:59PM +0200, Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:
> Erik Wikstr?m wrote:
> >>What one is saying in effect is "I may not have gotten all this right,
> >>or there may be surprises, so I want to see and specifically approve
> >>each/some actions".
> >
> >The problem arises when -i/-I us used with -f, which by the same
> >reasoning also should be at "the top of the food-chain". -f says that I
> >know what I'm doing so don't bother me with asking for confirmation. Not
> >that I don't approve of the way things are at the moment but I can see
> >why some might not agree.
>
> I don't agree with the meaning.  For me -f means "try to remove in every
> case and don't fail", i.e. also remove write-protected files and don't fail
> if the files didn't even exist.
>
I somewhat agree with this, but I understand both arguements.  Perhaps a
good compromise would be 'rm -ff'.
--Peter
This would defeat the purpose of -l.
I really dont see the issue here. No one is forcing anyone to use -l,
users that do not wish this behaviour just needs to remove the alias
-Jonas