Re: rm -rf and recursive nothing

["Jonas Trollvik" <jontro@xxxxxxxxx>]

If someone is bothered with it they can just remove the alias. The -l
flag is optional and people dont have to use it.
-Jonas


On 7/22/06, Erik Wikström <erik-wikstrom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2006-07-22 01:36, W B Hacker wrote:
> > Matthew Dillon wrote:
> >
> >> :...
> >> :> Personally I have an alias rd=rmdir (and md=mkdir), which
> >> :> is a left-over from my old DOS days.  :-)
> >> :>
> >> :> By the way, shouldn't -f override any previous -i or -I
> >> :> option?  At least that's what I would expect.  You don't
> >> :> type -f without a reason.
> >> :
> >> :This has been discussed (to death) before. I'd be all in for that, but
> >> :other people weren't.
> >> :
> >> :Sascha
> >>
> >>     Yah.  I've been going against popular opinion on this matter and I'm
> >>     going to continue going against it.  -I is not overriden by -f.  -I
> >>     does apply only to interactive shells, though, so it will not blow up
> >>     scripts.
> >>
> >>                                      -Matt
> >>                                      Matthew Dillon
> >>                                      <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Seems to me that -i / -I should indeed sit at the top of the food-chain. Always.
> >
> > 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.
>
> --
> Erik Wikström