Subject: Re: chflags wierdness
To: Ted Lemon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Kevin P. Neal <email@example.com>
Date: 04/14/1997 02:20:22
At 11:35 AM 4/13/97 -0700, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> Besides, if a user chooses to use extended protection measures such
>> as chflags(1), he _should_ know about ls(1)'s "-o" option. :-)
>What if the user didn't set the flag? The first time I got an EPERM
>trying to modify a chflagged file, it took be a while to figure out
>what was going on, and I already *knew* about flags. A random user
>isn't going to know. I'm not sure how to solve this problem - rm
>isn't the only program that could trip over this - but it definitely
>is a problem, and blaming the user isn't going to solve it.
How about a "file flags" manpage of some sort, with rm's manpage pointing to
it (see also...)?
Or maybe just make a larger note about it in the chflags(1) page, and have
rm's manpage point at that one?
XCOMM Kevin P. Neal, Junior, Comp. Sci. - House of Retrocomputing
XCOMM mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org - http://www.pobox.com/~kpn/
XCOMM email@example.com Spoken by Keir Finlow-Bates:
XCOMM "Good grief, I've just noticed I've typed in a rant. Sorry chaps!"