Confused by restore(8) man page example
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Mon Mar 4 21:12:56 UTC 2013
In message <20130304151707.GC76266 at jerrymc.net>,
Jerry McAllister <jerrymc at msu.edu> wrote:
>This and the previous reply are correct. This example shows
>a correct way to use 'restore -r'
>The '-r' flag causes it to write where you are cd-ed to without any
>warning what you are doing or overwriting. If there are other files
>in the directory that is to receive the files from a 'restore -r' has
>other files, you may unexpectedly overwrite some of them.
I'm thinking: If it is worth putting a warning into the man page,
perhaps it is worth putting a warning into the code itself, to
protect the unwary.
Anybody here ever used Clonezilla? A nice useful tool.
When Clonezilla runs, and when it is just about to overwrite a target
drive, it first asks you explicitly "Do you really want to proceed (Y/n)?"
After you respond "Y" it asks you again, one more time, the same question.
I for one have never felt put upon by these safety catches. I know they
are there for my own protection.
Maybe restore should have something similar, along with some special
option to disable the extra security check, you know, for use in
non-interactive batch scripts.
>you are not cd-ed in to the correct place (the mount point, for example)
>using the '-r' will quickly write all over whatever directory you
>are cd-ed to without warning. In other words '-r' causes it to
>splat out everything right where you are without warning and too fast
>to interrupt it before too much damage is done.
This is quite obviously different than "rm -fr *", but I can see how
it could be equally disasterous.
More information about the freebsd-questions