Subject: Re: Larger rm Change
To: None <>
From: Lucio De Re <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 01/10/2003 07:32:21
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 11:42:51AM -0800, wrote:
> there are, of course, exceptions to this: rm -rf won't remove stuff
> on, say, a read-only file system.  So, if your '*' includes things
> that traverse a ro fs's mount point...
Shall we say that it would be preferable if rm -rf continued to
behave the way it does presently, whichever way that swings?  And
that an "F" option would provide the alternative?