Subject: Re: Little prob with rm
To: John Nemeth <>
From: Gary D. Duzan <>
List: current-users
Date: 10/30/1994 09:31:48
In Message <> ,
   John Nemeth <> wrote:

=>On Oct 30,  2:14am, Olaf Seibert wrote:
=>} Subject: Re: Little prob with rm
=>} For completeness, I would even argue for dir/file/.. being equivalent
=>} to just dir, which is (in unix notation) what AmigaDOS does. Except that
=>} under Unix a file has no ".." entry but under AmigaDOS the ParentDir()
=>} of a file is defined and useful.
=>     I totally disagree with this.  It is a major violation of the
=>rule of least astonishment, as it is a major change to UNIX filesystem
=>semantics.  Under UNIX file, do not have directories, which I feel
=>is the way it should be.
   Agreed. Besides, what if "file" was a symlink? Would you get "dir"
or the directory of the file the link was referencing?

                                      Gary D. Duzan
                         Humble Practitioner of the Computer Arts