[Gllug] 'safe' deletion of files

Bernard Peek bap at shrdlu.com
Thu Aug 12 15:51:38 UTC 2004

In message <16665.63717.69633.986479 at chiark.greenend.org.uk>, David 
Damerell <damerell at chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes
>On Wednesday, 11 Aug 2004, Ashley Evans wrote:
>>>David Damerell <damerell at chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:-
>>>>The real answer to this one is that by all means one should have a
>>>>non-permanent deletion command, but it absolutely should not be called
>>>>"rm". Then when users get used to it, it will just not work on other
>[t.clarke's "rms" as a kinder gentler "rm"]
>>Why not add secure deleting to regular 'rm', have rm and rms* to do
>>pretend delete and real delete respectively.
>That's an amazingly bad plan because users get used to "rm" being
>pretend delete and then use it recklessly on other systems where it is
>not so configured. The problem being talked about at the start of the

This feature is one of the selling points of the new Windows systems, 
the shadow copies of files. In my career the only thing I've ever used 
backup copies for was restoring files someone had accidentally deleted.

I suspect that people moving from Windows to Linux will soon come to 
expect this feature. I think that's an argument for using the "del" 
command for safe deletions.

Bernard Peek
London, UK. DBA, Manager, Trainer & Author. Will work for money.

Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk

More information about the GLLUG mailing list