[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Poll: what should happen when -delete fails?
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: Poll: what should happen when -delete fails? |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:49:11 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Eric Blake scripsit:
> > 1. If unlink or rmdir fails, should the -delete action return true or false?
False, I'd say, so you can write -delete -o -dothisorthat.
> > 2. If -delete returns false because it fails, should find also return
> > nonzero?
I lean toward no, but I'm not too sure. I would never depend on find's return
value in any case because it is kept deliberately vague.
> > 3. Should -delete issue a message on stderr if it fails, or (on the
> > other hand) should it be possible for the caller to choose how the
> > message is phrased by doing something like this?
Print a message always. Being able to issue a custom message is much less
important than being notified that a particular deletion failed.
> 4. Should -delete imply -depth, be forbidden unless -depth was specified,
> or be allowed to attempt operation without -depth (in which case deleting
> directory hierarchies will fail because the rmdir is attempted before the
> contents of the directory)?
Imply -depth.
I would add:
5. Should -delete do a 'rm -rf' if the directory being deleted is non-empty?
I'd say yes; this allows you e.g. to look in a directory tree for directories
named 'temp' and delete them no matter what their contents.
--
We pledge allegiance to the penguin John Cowan
and to the intellectual property regime address@hidden
for which he stands, one world under http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Linux, with free music and open source
software for all. --Julian Dibbell on Brazil, edited