Re: rm -f and unexecutable directories

[Jim Meyering]

address@hidden (Bob Proulx) wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Ed Avis wrote:
>> > In that case could I make a feature request for a new flag
>> >
>> >     -F, --really-force
>> >             As --force but also change permissions if necessary.
>>
>> It's feasible.
>> I'm not enthusiastic about this, but not strongly opposed either.
>> Let's see if anyone else has strong opinions on the matter.
>
> Adding a new option would not break any previously existing scripts.
> So I agree that it is feasible.  But I don't prefer it since its use
> would not be portable systems which are standard but don't have this
> extension.

Don't worry :-)
I looked into it a little, and am now even less enthusiastic.
Doing it right would mean changes that are way too invasive.
They'd have to handle failed chdir, opendir, readdir and retry
after a chmod.  rm is plenty complicated already.