svn commit: r214431 - head/bin/rm

[Alexander Best]

On Wed Oct 27 10, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 10/27/10 14:26, Alexander Best wrote:
> >are in fact COW fs the only exception where the -P flag won't work? before
> >r213582 LFS was mentioned here and that the block size must be fixed.
> >also the comment in rm.c says that -P won't work for any logging file 
> >systems.
> >i'm not a fs expert, but i think mentioning that -P won't work for COW fs 
> >isn't
> >enough.
> 
> What may be a better approach is to confirm the fs' that DO work, list 
> them, and then add something to the effect of, "This feature is unlikely 
> to work on other file systems."

i don't think that's a good approach, because then the rm(1) has to be changed
everytime freebsd gets a new fs which works with the -P option. i think it's
better to list which fs semantics DON'T work. so if freebsd gets a new fs,
users simply have to know which semantics the new fs is based on and can decide
for themselves whether the -P switch will work or not.

so far the -P option doesn't seem to work for:

- COW fs and/or
- fs with a variable block size and/or
- fs which do journaling

please correct me if i got anything wrong. so i think having such a list in the
rm(1) manual would be very nice (maybe improving the comment in rm.c too).

cheers.
alex

> 
> 
> hth,
> 
> Doug
> 
> -- 
> 
> 	Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
> 			-- OK Go
> 
> 	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
> 	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/
> 

-- 
a13x