On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 26 April 2013 18:34, Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2013/04/26 14:30, Eitan Adler wrote: > >> The attached patch adds an "x" option to rm(1) to avoid cross > >> filesystem boundaries. > > > > Isn't it better to just use find(1)'s -x option for this? It would be > > silly to add an option like this to all the places where it might be > > useful (besides rm this type of operation is definitely useful for > > chmod and chown, and I'm sure there are others..) > > The entirety of rm's functionality can be replicated with find(1).
Really? Without executing 'rm'? Or perhaps you were just talking about the -R option. Oh, I see, freebsd added -delete to their find too. Hahaha. Regardless, I don't see how your response addresses Stuart's concerns. The threshold for adding new stuff is greater than for the existing functionality. How is this going to be used? In practice, I would suspect that someone will use it by creating an alias rm='rm -x', as you need it exactly when you don't remember that there's another mount present...and the person that creates an alias can just as well use a script or shell function to be their paranoia. > We had a similar conversion on -hackers: > http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Some-improvements-to-rm-1-td5806672.html#none Note that OpenBSD doesn't have cp -x either. Philip
