--GBlkOKZ0utbUai18
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 01:00:14PM -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
[...]
> > As far as I can tell, removing the "-rm" option harms nothing.
> > On the other hand, leaving the current "-rm" option introduces
> > security problem as I said.
>=20
> How oes the rm option introduce a security problem?

Why do you think -delete is paranoid?

> >> I'd like us to fix things so everything does what users would
> >> expect, both documentation and code.
> >
> > At least current "-rm" implementaion is incorrect.
> > So what we can do now is to remove the "-rm" option.
>=20
> I do not want to see the option removed.

In the over 10 years FreeBSD had -delete, they didn't feel the need to
grow a -rm option.  I say, back out -rm now and continue this appealing
discussion in 10 years.

--=20
Quentin Garnier - cube@cubidou.net - cube@NetBSD.org
"You could have made it, spitting out benchmarks
Owe it to yourself not to fail"
Amplifico, Spitting Out Benchmarks, Hometakes Vol. 2, 2005.

--GBlkOKZ0utbUai18
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (NetBSD)

iQEVAwUBRctma9goQloHrPnoAQIOAgf/Qrzy2wANDfV8nLADn0WKYLxw2iBY6qjz
q/c3n/iB66aTOQUxCGc4tTNeiFsHjcUv3qFz28/e0//mDtZlcBdoBtC/NmBMkSB7
/gf+cfm3E7SeJpbTZQadzQuR084Dzo71FdSi+/pF5b2LckD+ci9zjbHE91UX8kwO
u0B7J60Flf5PmeaG2PIXy7ZWF/lPVlVWb4KgpiMAi8yYna7smV6detLquMT5MIin
J1T2cHH6TljbxuFV3srUKzu3z9/XFyo1iBfo9pAkwUtv2PrRbcyV8yFAD4cVgs5C
AV8QX16rR4ZI2Nu8oDZtdqctYL4l7hLoPu/PBE3GTo/LP0iY5HDCzw==
=Ao2M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--GBlkOKZ0utbUai18--