| Art Alexion on 1 Feb 2006 20:20:16 -0000 |
|
bergman@merctech.com wrote: >In the message dated: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 14:44:57 EST, >The pithy ruminations from Art Alexion on ><Re: [PLUG] Interactive rm> were: >=> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) >=> --------------enig82C6FEFB5B54D8F5D42F78F1 >=> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >=> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >=> >=> bergman@merctech.com wrote: >=> >=> >the original posted requested a slightly >=> >different behavior, as in: >=> > if there are multiple arguments to rm, then run rm interactively >=> > if there is a single argument to rm, then run rm non-interactively >=> > >=> >This is not as trivial as it appears. While it's easy to count the number of >=> >arguments and call "rm -i" if there's more than one argument, this doesn't deal >=> >correctly with arguments that are options, not the targets of the rm command. >=> >In addition, rm is sensitive to the order of arguments, and it's easy to get >=> >unexpected results when combining "-f" and "-i". I'm also skipping over the >=> >issues with targets that have embedded whitespace in their names... >=> > >=> >=> > How can I restore rm's default behavior so that "rm *" requires >=> >=> > confirmation, but "rm specified_file" does not? >=> > >=> >Here's a bash shell function that will do what you want. This fragment of code >=> >can be put in your ~/.bashrc file. Note that the function, as named, will work >=> >when called as "myrm". You can change this to "rm" and therefore hide how "rm" >=> >really behaves. >=> > >=> > >=> Thank you Mark. That does the trick. A couple of test yield the >=> following, though: >=> > > >=> * though it doesn't treat options as file arguments, it does not >=> pass the options to rm, so 'saferm -f *' still runs rm as 'rm -i *' > >Um, it _does_ pass the options to rm. > >Nope. If multiple targets are present, the function calls: > rm $all-options -i $targets >this is because the "-f" and "-i" options are mutually exclusive, and whichever >appears last on the command line "wins". The original program specification >didn't say anything about using "-f", so the shell function puts "-i" last in >the list of options, thus overriding "-f" if it's present. > >Submit a change request to the development team, wait for managerial approval >and budgetary allocation. Depending on available resources and priority, and >the schedule of the test team, you should have the beta version by Q3 2006. >Once it's been approved by the User Acceptance Group, and the technical writer >updates the documentation, it can be released. :) > >Or, you can edit the shell function, and change: > /bin/rm $options -i $targets >to > /bin/rm -i $options $targets > > > Yup. I read that (last option wins) in either the rm man page or the bash man page. Thanks for the code change. >=> * You are right that it doesn't work with files with embedded spaces. > >:) > >=> >=> Thanks, again. I really appreciate the help. > >Sure. Not a problem. > > -- _______________________________________ Art Alexion Arthur S. Alexion LLC PGP fingerprint: 52A4 B10C AA73 096F A661 92D2 3B65 8EAC ACC5 BA7A The attachment -- signature.asc -- is my electronic signature; no need for alarm. Info @ http://mysite.verizon.net/art.alexion/encryption/signature.asc.what.html Key for signed PDFs available at http://mysite.verizon.net/art.alexion/encryption/ArthurSAlexion.p7c The validation string is TTJY-ZILJ-BJJG. ________________________________________ Attachment:
signature.asc ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|