On 12/12/12, Themba Fletcher <[email protected]> wrote: > to alias 'fossil rm' to 'fossil rm -f'.
That is a disaster waiting to happen. If the user in question forgets that they've done that, and then runs a series of commands from someone who *didn't* do that (either cut-n-paste from an answer on the list or the web, as part of a script for doing something, or whatever), they'll wind up removing files that nobody wanted removed. An alias mechanism is fine, but it really shouldn't let users change the behavior of builtin commands. Either aliases should have to have different names, or be invoked by some other mechanism. Both of those sort of defeat the purpose of the rm alias, though. <mike _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
