Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #11403
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | gnu.bash.bug |
| Subject | Re: -e does not take effects in subshell |
| Date | 2015-08-19 08:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.25.1440113732.31004.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <BLU176-W27103575D91F4EF315336FD67D0@phx.gbl> <55CC26A7.10000@redhat.com> <55D39A71.2030109@tlinx.org> <87mvxo5mme.fsf@igel.home> <55D3B22E.9040507@tlinx.org> |
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 03:31:10PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: > with 'rm' functionality to remove '/' '.' and '..' was prohibited > by POSIX, though the coreutils version still allows the choice > of the more dangerous removal of '/' with with the --[no-]preserve-root. > > But the more useful "rm -fr ." [...] OK. I think you are saying that the POSIX specification sentence If either of the files dot or dot-dot are specified as the basename portion of an operand (that is, the final pathname component) or if an operand resolves to the root directory, rm shall write a diagnostic message to standard error and do nothing more with such operands. conflicts with your prior use of the GNU rm --one-file-system extension as a shorthand for "find . -xdev -delete". Since GNU already has a --no-preserve-root extension, as you pointed out, I don't see what would stop them from adding another extension to permit GNUrm -rfx . to work. Perhaps you should come up with an appropriate syntax for it and submit a patch to the GNU coreutils maintainers. This is not related to bash. (Wow, how did we get here from "-e does not take effects in subshell"?)
Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar
Re: -e does not take effects in subshell Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2015-08-19 08:42 -0400
csiph-web