On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 09:09:29AM +0200, Pierg75 wrote:
> Adam Funk wrote:
> >On Wednesday 12 May 2004 17:40, Pierg75 wrote:
> >>Somewhere i read that an alias should never be an alias of itself,
> >>something like alias rm='rm -i'
> >alias ls='ls --color=auto'
> >alias rm='rm -vi'
> >alias cp='cp -vi'
> >alias mv='mv -vi'
> >alias cal='cal -3m' # week starts on Monday
> >
> >and I'm sure I got this idea from some reputable Unix books. This way
> >rm always asks *except* when you use -f.
>
> It works for sure, because somewhere i use it too.
> I was meaning about the comcept:
> because if you get use of this approach, when you go to work on a
> machine that doesn't have this alias, immagine what you coul do if you
> write rm /etc/apache/* because you are sure (or you don't pay
> attention) that would ask you to confirm.
> Since i read that article (it was on a magazine), i try to don't use
> this kind of aliases and to pay more attention on what i'm doing.
>
Hello,
within bash, you could use an alternate kind of aliases in order to
circumvent any reentrance problem under a different OS:
alias rm='/bin/rm -vi'
or
alias cd="builtin cd ${CDHOME}"
--
Wilko Fokken Education is a man's going
Landschaftspolder 67 from cocksure ignorance
D-26831 Dollart to thoughtful uncertainty.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
