Unix at its worst

Post #3,433 by Arkadiy 8/1/01 12:16:14 PM Reply	Unix at its worst Somebody was complaining in e-mail today that a bunch of important files got deleted by incorrect "rm -r" Here is one of the answers he got: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A handy tip for directories you MUST keep. Create a file at the top level called '-i'. Now if you do a rm *, you'll implicitly get rm -i, which will force you to confirm deletions. I've created one in the top level /build. It'd be worth putting one in your top level master directories. It's not bullet proof, but it helps <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Post #3,437 by jlalexander 8/1/01 12:26:38 PM Reply	Oh, good idea! ---- My pid is Inigo Montoya. You "killed -9" my parent process. Prepare to vi.
Post #3,459 by Yendor 8/1/01 2:07:32 PM Reply	That freakin' rocks! So simple, yet so obscure. We love it here at work! -YendorMike In order to understand recursion, one must understand recursion.
Post #3,575 by Simon_Jester 8/2/01 12:26:51 AM 8/2/01 12:27:32 AM Reply	Why not simply create a background process that every hour or so creates a (hard, not symbolic) link to the files in those important directories? (Say to a /saved directory). rm is only going to remove the file if all of the inodes are gone, and since an inode for the file exist (to /saved) the file won't be deleted. Kewl thing is, all it costs in space is an extra directory entry. If you really want to have fun, this background process is owned by someone else and users won't be able to delete files through it. (They can overwrite files with an empty file, howeverm and the background process will pick it up.) Edited by Simon_Jester Aug. 2, 2001, 12:27:32 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #3,747 by deSitter 8/3/01 1:06:04 PM Reply	Good Admin = Lack of Hacks Do things the right way - pay attention, be careful, and keep backups.
Post #3,675 by kmself 8/2/01 10:18:07 PM Reply	A crutch You can do this. It works. It's a good thing to know about (also a useful thing to keep in mind when `ls` or `rm` commands fail to performa as expected). But it's a crutch. Better: use, and learn the use of, an effective version control system, and backups. The problem with crutches are that you come to depend on them. At some point, you'll find yourself in one of two situations: there is no crutch (you're elsewhere, without it), or it's been kicked out from under you (someone's removed the '-i' file), and you'll make a mistake. Better learn to live without it. -- Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
Post #3,741 by deSitter 8/3/01 12:59:39 PM Reply	100% Correct Moreover, it will hork exec clauses in find commands. It's a terrible idea.
Post #3,826 by kmself 8/4/01 5:30:55 PM Reply	- - (dash dash) DeSitter notes that oddly named files can interfere with other directory-access commands (eg: find). I made a similar observation regarding 'ls' and 'rm' commands being borked by dash files. This can usually be circumvented by trailing a command with a '`--`' (that'a double-dash), particularly when giving a wildcard or otherwise expanded filelist as arguments. In many shell tools, a double-dash without arguments indicates end of arguments. Exceptions prove the rule, naturally. In `startx`, a double-dash seperates client and server options. -- Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
Post #3,693 by pwhysall 8/3/01 2:48:54 AM Reply	Sounds unnecessarily complicated. Why wouldn't a simple alias of "rm" to "rm -i" in the system login script be better? -- Peter Shill For Hire
Post #3,743 by deSitter 8/3/01 1:02:00 PM Reply	Better, But Also Bad Aliases belong in individual profiles. I'm very much against system-wide aliases.
Post #3,806 by pwhysall 8/4/01 2:12:37 AM Reply	Agree But while we're holding the user's hand... -- Peter Shill For Hire
Post #3,808 by pwhysall 8/4/01 4:33:45 AM Reply	Just thinkin... ...that you can't say that ("Aliases belong in individual profiles") in an unqualified manner. It's not always true. Systems Administration is all about the devising and applying of policy, which is presumably intended to provide levels of availability and service according to business needs. Such a policy might be along the lines of "to avoid costly file restoration procedures, the system shall be required to use rm -i for all interactive file deletions". Sure, it's not "pure". But if aliasing "rm" to "rm -i" in the system login script on a development box saves me from having to 1. consult the backup paperwork to determine which tape the files are on 2. go to the fire safe 3. get the tapes 4. catalogue the tapes 5. restore the files 6. Put the tapes back in the fire safe 7. Goto 1, the user never tells you which files they really want first time around then I'm all for it. -- Peter Shill For Hire
Post #3,820 by Ashton 8/4/01 3:58:37 PM Reply	Triumph of the practical over the Pure? Remember renaming format? to _ormat, in situations where the rash outnumbered the marginally clueful, not to mention fdisk (did the very first versions sport, "Are You Sure?") Ever thus. [arrogant coders rant] Gotta love rm -r. Noticed on a site, the reply to an unabashed newbie who had asked a question without er.. 'proper respect'? (or maybe disdain for RTFM) or maybe someone's Evul Twin was loose.. Misplaced the link - funny in a wings-off-butterflies sense of 'fun'. It was evident even to me that - his hd1 was never going to be the same. I mean, certain letter-combinations are instantly ALERTing. The rest of long thread had to do with various.. "He DID it?" Yup.. "Oh God - WHY did you tell him That?" "I didn't think he'd Really do it.." You asshole. "I didn't think he'd really DO it..." "Well can he recover with ___ ?" Nope.. "Was it hd0? "Nope" Anyway.. when ya keep the scalpels in the same drawer with the pick-up-sticks game pieces - you WILL get cut. I guess that *nix is postulated upon the idea that "Are You Sure" is for wimps. How sweet. Arrogance. Some days we are ALL wimps. Is an extra [Y] really too much to waste (287 mSec average) VS massive destruction / drudgery next? [/rant] Have a Nice Daze, Oh Perfect Practitioners & Typists
Post #3,839 by Andrew Grygus 8/4/01 8:42:22 PM Reply	That extra [Y] - unacceptable. No, that wouldn't work. The reason Unix commands ask no questions is they are used by automation scripts most of the time and the questions would either be confusing or there would be no one there to answer them. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #3,850 by cforde 8/5/01 1:28:58 AM Reply	Re: That extra [Y] - unacceptable. How many times do you blindly answer 'OK' or 'Y' or... how often has it saved you? right, it's just an annoyance. It works the first few times you encounter it and thereafter it just gets in the way. If you're gonna mess up, that extra prompt is likely to save you only if you've never seen it before and maybe not even then. The only way to protect against something like 'rm -r' is to simply not have that feature. But it would be too painful to live without. That's why we have backups... Have fun, Carl Forde
Post #3,854 by Ashton 8/5/01 3:44:07 AM Reply	OK disable w/scripts natch. But: 'self-destruct CR'?____:[
Post #3,856 by pwhysall 8/5/01 5:39:18 AM Reply	Not really. The reason UNIX commands ask no questions by default is that when UNIX was designed, the people using the OS were, well, the people who wrote it. The user base was never envisioned as expanding beyond the highly technically capable scientific and computing academics who first used it. Compare and contrast UNIX and VMS, which was commercial from the outset, intended for use by real human beans. One example will suffice. To get help on a command, you type "man foo" on UNIX. On VMS, you type "HELP FOO". -- Peter Shill For Hire
Post #3,864 by Ashton 8/5/01 3:32:23 PM Reply	Personally.. prefer: wombat foo. Nice ring to it -
Post #3,865 by a6l6e6x 8/5/01 3:40:30 PM Reply	Re: Personally..., I prefer: foo man choo. :) Alex Only two things are certain: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not certain about the universe. -- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Post #3,871 by Ashton 8/5/01 4:21:16 PM Reply	LRPD settles All! Three rings for the elven-kings under the sky Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone. Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. One Ring to rule them all One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them And still reigneth The Ring !! Only now it taketh the form of the omnipresent, greatly sought after.. hallowed sound of The Cash Register... When everyone has bar-code price tags on foreheads.. only Outlaws shall have no price on their head.
Post #3,964 by tseliot 8/6/01 2:03:57 PM Reply	Hey! That's my other alternate personality! fumanchu@amor.org It's my radio handle :) That's her, officer! That's the woman that programmed me for evil!
Post #3,830 by boxley 8/4/01 7:25:21 PM Reply	much better way cd / mkdir * then wait ]:^> thanks, bill Our bureaucracy and our laws have turned the world into a clean, safe work camp. We are raising a nation of slaves. Chuck Palahniuk

Welcome to IWETHEY!