[lug] cp and rm
John.Hernandez at noaa.gov
Wed Aug 1 16:32:34 MDT 2001
Going back to where all this started, I really think RH's move, namely aliasing cp and rm to safer variants, was a fair and good decision. One of most often-heard complaits about Linux (more specifically UFS-based filesystems) is that it's too easy to irreversably delete something. This gives more novice users a safeguard against the inadvertent rm *, right out of the box. IMHO, it's a necessary move (if perhaps an inconvenience for advanced users) if this great OS is going to be more widely adopted.
I have found that it is good practice in shell programming to hardcode the absolute path to common /bin binaries such as /bin/rm and /bin/cp. Not doing so reduces portability (among different users, and even across OS upgrades) and opens the door for unintended results like what happened to David. One thing we can PROBABLY count on is that the basic set of /bin programs will always be there, and they always do what we intend.
Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "David" == David <dajo at frii.com> writes:
> David> As a general rule - there are exceptions - having something
> David> work and then not work is plain lousy; and, furthermore, will
> David> soon have Linux, in the large, down to M$ standards. I write
> David> "in the large" to mean what a user gets and thinks of when he
> David> installs "Linux", i.e., a distribution. I note that I have
> David> seen a number of postings about RH7.1 on the list. I have a
> David> fairly low opinion of the quality of RedHat software, although
> David> cp and rm probably are not theirs.
> Do you have some specific piece of Red Hat software you are unhappy
> with? For particular reasons?
> Web Page: http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
- John Hernandez - Network Engineer - 303-497-6392 -
| National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration |
| Mailstop R/OM12. 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305 |
More information about the LUG