[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/18]
> On Dec 18, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Peter da Silva wrote: > > % sh longrunningprogram.sh > /tmp/stuff & > > % rm /tmp/stuff > > longrunningprogram.sh: output deleted -- core dumped > > % > > > > Oh, that's definitely better! > It's disengenius to present these as the only two options. That's the option that was suggested. But, OK, let's try it your way. % sh longrunningprogram.sh > /tmp/stuff$$ & % rm /tmp/stuff$$ rm: /tmp/stuff12315: File open % ls /tmp stuff1419 stuff1420 stuff1466 stuff1501 ... stuff31718 % df /tmp ... 30k free % rm -f /tmp/stuff* % df /tmp ... 1.5G free > Clearly it would be easy (and reasonable, I think) to have 'rm' at > least print a warning on stderr, if not require a -f flag to force, > for you to delete the last link to a file that's open for writing. I don't want "rm" to print a warning to stderr (let alone refuse to remove a file) for an action that is almost always not merely harmless but desirable. The point is that there is NO default that isn't sometimes. All software sucks, all software is hateful. I believe the way a good UNIX environment operates is less hateful than the alternatives I've used.
Generated at 03:01 on 20 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52