Re: new expected behavior? src/bin/rm/rm.c

[Sascha Wildner <saw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon wrote:

>     I've always considered -f to simply mean to have rm attempt to
>     override file perms.  I didn't even realize that it overrides -i
>     until you mentioned it... that actually sounds like a mistake to me,
>     it shouldn't do both!  I don't think we want -f to override -I.  -I
>     is not meant to be treated the same as -i.  -I is supposed to be a
>     non-intrusive 'smart' option.

Maybe we want -F to override -I. :)

Sascha

--
http://yoyodyne.ath.cx