[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories |
Date: |
Sat, 08 Nov 2003 22:29:24 +0100 |
address@hidden (Bob Proulx) wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Ed Avis wrote:
>> > In that case could I make a feature request for a new flag
>> >
>> > -F, --really-force
>> > As --force but also change permissions if necessary.
>>
>> It's feasible.
>> I'm not enthusiastic about this, but not strongly opposed either.
>> Let's see if anyone else has strong opinions on the matter.
>
> Adding a new option would not break any previously existing scripts.
> So I agree that it is feasible. But I don't prefer it since its use
> would not be portable systems which are standard but don't have this
> extension.
Don't worry :-)
I looked into it a little, and am now even less enthusiastic.
Doing it right would mean changes that are way too invasive.
They'd have to handle failed chdir, opendir, readdir and retry
after a chmod. rm is plenty complicated already.
- rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/07
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Jim Meyering, 2003/11/07
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Jim Meyering, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Bob Proulx, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories,
Jim Meyering <=
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Bob Proulx, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/09
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Bob Proulx, 2003/11/08
- Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories, Ed Avis, 2003/11/09