Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 22:51:02 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: "Kevin P. Neal" <kpn@neutralgood.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rm -rf -Mitigating the dangers Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1604172241110.93193@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <20160418001110.GA82868@neutralgood.org> References: <CAAdA2WNqWACnjiUSHhYWL1nEj=YGPPURqJHsAcjaXYacziXsfg@mail.gmail.com> <57140EA2.6020503@holgerdanske.com> <20160418001110.GA82868@neutralgood.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 17 Apr 2016, Kevin P. Neal wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 03:30:58PM -0700, David Christensen wrote: >> On 04/17/2016 10:10 AM, Odhiambo Washington wrote: >>> I am wondering if I should place a feature request on this or just do it my >>> way:) >>> >>> With great power comes great responsibility and as such I think there >>> should be a wrapper around rm to warn sysadmins that what they are about to >>> do with -rf is dangerous, yes? >>> >>> Read input from sysadmin 3 times, looking strictly for their confirmation >>> before effecting the `rm -rf`. >>> >>> Could it be that what I am smoking/drinking is the issue here or I have >>> your support? LOL >> >> I have this in my .bashrc: >> >> alias rm='rm -i --one-file-system' >> >> So, an accidental 'rm -rf' should limit destruction to one file system. > > And, for those occasions where your job is on the line, it is important > to know that "pwd" and "/bin/pwd" do _not_ work the same. If you really > want to know where you are before you do a "rm -rf *" then you must use > the "/bin/pwd" command. I suggest to never give rm -rf an unqualified "*". Using a path with rm -rf doesn't make it safe, but it does make it safer. It's a good protective habit to develop.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1604172241110.93193>