Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: per@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Per Hedeland)
- Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 15:22:24 +0000 (UTC)
In article <20060311122256.7f7f3490.steveo@xxxxxxxxxx> Steve
O'Hara-Smith <steveo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 12:12:55 +0000 (UTC)
per@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Per Hedeland) wrote:
In article <20060310231848.54f6fe86.steveo@xxxxxxxxxx> Steve
O'Hara-Smith <steveo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Don't do that! It hurts! Just rm ./name_of_link no -r.
Probably good advice, but as pointed out in another followup, it's not
the -r but the (not mentioned in the original post) trailing slash that
hurts:
It's the combination - removing either the -r or the trailing /
stops the damage, but IMHO removing the -r is better viz:
On the other hand, removing the trailing / actually gets some useful
work done.:-)
Nice safe error message and no damage. Also makes more sense,
if you don't want a recursive remove don't ask for one :)
Agreed, recursively removing a symlink makes no sense - but it does
work.:-)
--Per Hedeland
per@xxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: Ditch Brodie
- Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- References:
- Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: Ditch Brodie
- Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: Per Hedeland
- Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- From: Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Delete a Symbolic Link?
- Prev by Date: Strange behaviour intalling any release
- Next by Date: Re: cant get user access to second hard drive
- Previous by thread: Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- Next by thread: Re: Delete a Symbolic Link?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|