[klibc] [PATCH] simple rm command
H. Peter Anvin
hpa at zytor.com
Sun Sep 5 20:25:37 PDT 2004
Russell King wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
>>'rm -rf /' for klibc
>>Doesnt comply to the standard, but does the job.
> I'd argue that any standard utilities should comply with POSIX - that
> is the approach I took with all the other klibc support utilities.
> The reason I took this approach is that I've used busybox. It's
> extremely annoying and frustrating when you come across commands
> which refuse to behave correctly for one reason or another.
> I suggest that if we're going to be implementing less functionality
> than POSIX, that the differences are documented somewhere so it can
> be fixed later if required.
In general, I think implementing a subset of POSIX is OK as long as the
subset is somewhat obviously not needed (rm -i, for example.)
More information about the klibc