On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:30:02 +1030 "Daniel O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Silently ignoring user specified options is seldom a good way to go.
> > The user explicitly stated he wants to wipe the file contents.
>
> I disagree that the user really meant to wipe the file if its link
> count is >1.
That of course may or may not be true. I still do not like the 'silent'
part.
> IMO having rm -P not wipe the file if its link count is >1 is a good
> idea. if you are deleting a tree containing a file with links then
> this will result in the file getting wiped in the end anyway because
> the link count will be 1 after the first link is removed.
>
> It would be easy enough to add a diagnostic message in the -P case
> where the link count is >1.
Yes, see my other mails. Bahviour similar to OpenBSD (don't overwrite,
generate warning, unlink) is probably what should be done.
The pitfall may really be too big.
Joerg
--
| /"\ ASCII ribbon | GnuPG Key ID | e86d b753 3deb e749 6c3a |
| \ / campaign against | 0xbbcaad24 | 5706 1f7d 6cfd bbca ad24 |
| X HTML in email | .the next sentence is true. |
| / \ and news | .the previous sentence was a lie. |
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
