C and C++ programs do not use the "um" command internally. They use "unlink", which is what the "rm" commad uses internally, which I see scattered throughout the source code. C functions are not going to be interactive unless someone actually programs in a deliberate interaction.
That said, I can attest that "rm" has been doing this for at least 15 years. My memory is hazy about it, but I *do* think this was the behavior in BSD 4.2, 25 years ago. On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 12:44 AM, David Chapman <dcchap...@acm.org> wrote: > On 11/19/2013 6:28 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> >> On Nov 18, 2013, at 10:37, Rick Varney wrote: >> >>> So for Redhat 5, rm does seem to give read-only files some special >>> treatment. The fact that rm on your OS does not makes me wonder if I am >>> wrong about how typical this behavior is in other Linux/Unix flavors. >> >> Both GNU rm (used on Linux) and BSD rm (used on OS X and *BSD) do this. >> From the BSD rm manpage on OS X 10.9: > > > It's quite possible that I haven't read the rm man page since the 1980s. > :-) Also, the only time I tend to have read-only files is when I am running > as superuser, in which case I run "rm -f" to get rid of stuff without the > prompt from the "rm -i" alias that is the default within the superuser > account. So I have never seen the prompt. > > For the record, my machines mostly run CentOS, so they have the behavior > described. I just confirmed this by creating a read-only file in a > non-superuser account. Guess I learned something today. > > -- > David Chapman dcchap...@acm.org > Chapman Consulting -- San Jose, CA > Software Development Done Right. > www.chapman-consulting-sj.com >
