bug#6402: [PATCH] rm: remove no-op -d option
Eric Blake wrote: On 09/17/2010 03:13 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: Jim, what do you think of this alternative patch, which avoids the issue of a new translation string by instead letting getopt parsing reject -d like any other unknown option? I like it. Thank you. ... --- a/NEWS ... + rm -d now issues an error rather than being silently ignored. How about a slight change in wording to make clear that the entire rm command was not being ignored. rm's -d now evokes an error; before, it was silently ignored. Pushed with that change. Closing.
bug#6402: [PATCH] rm: remove no-op -d option
Eric Blake wrote: * src/rm.c (long_opts, main): Resolve a fixme. * NEWS: Document the change. Based on a report by William Plusnick. --- Jim, what do you think of this alternative patch, which avoids the issue of a new translation string by instead letting getopt parsing reject -d like any other unknown option? I like it. Thank you. ... --- a/NEWS ... + rm -d now issues an error rather than being silently ignored. How about a slight change in wording to make clear that the entire rm command was not being ignored. rm's -d now evokes an error; before, it was silently ignored.
bug#6402: [PATCH] rm: remove no-op -d option
On 09/17/2010 03:13 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: Jim, what do you think of this alternative patch, which avoids the issue of a new translation string by instead letting getopt parsing reject -d like any other unknown option? I like it. Thank you. ... --- a/NEWS ... + rm -d now issues an error rather than being silently ignored. How about a slight change in wording to make clear that the entire rm command was not being ignored. rm's -d now evokes an error; before, it was silently ignored. Pushed with that change. -- Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com+1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
