James Youngman wrote: > While I think about it, it might also be worth enhancing > the --help output to point out that "rm ./*" is safe while "rm *" > might do things you did not expect (think "touch ./-rf").
It just seems so scary putting in a suggestion "rm ./*". Also I might debate as to the "safer" wording. I know you mean less "likely to be confused as an option". In which case I would say that instead of the word safe. Safe implies not going to do unindented damage. But a command like rm by intent removes files. And just the same we all know people who have removed files and then said oops, I wanted my file back, isn't there some way to make rm safe where it refuses to remove files that I might actually want to keep even though I told it to remove them? :-) I agree with Paul, let's let sleeping dogs lie. Bob _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
