reopen 21084
thanks
Andreas Schwab wrote:
Linda Walsh <coreut...@tlinx.org> writes:
In looking at the 2013 specification for rm
(http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/rm.html),
it no longer says to stop processing if the path basename equals
"." or "..".
"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."
----
I'll grant it also says you can't remove "/",
So a special flag "--use_depth_first_inspection" that says not to look
at
a "basename" until it's children have been processed wouldn't be any more
out of place than special flags to handle "/" processing, right?
The fact that they put the ".", ".." and "/" together, outside of
the 1-4 processing leads one to the idea that they should be treated similarly,
no?
