🚀 go-pugleaf

>>>>> "C" == Christopher Oliver <oliver@co.traverse.com> writes:

C> SaskPower (spc@leroy.cc.uregina.ca) wrote: : I personally don't think
C> Theodore T'so should be spending time : with an undelete to ext2 filesystem
C> to handle this, as the above is : so easy to confiugure to your needs and
C> would be more reliable : than changes to a filesystem... ext2 is just GREAT
C> the way it is... 8^)

C> Easy, but not a total solution.  Please bear in mind as you read the
C> following that I'm a great fan of UNIX since I started hacking Sun-3s back
C> in 1988... o.k. I guess that makes me a UNIX newbie, but I started
C> programming back in the RT-11 days.  I get along just wonderfully with the
C> "rm is forever" philosophy, on the other hand, I keep reasonable backups.

Same here (well, 1992).  rm is forever
(the shell should catch those thumb accidents like 'rm * .c')

C> I think the UNIX crowd could stand to glance over the "Accidents Will
C> Happen" section of UNIX-Haters Handbook.  Yes the book has a lot of
C> whining, but there are some important things to note: perhaps the most
C> important things being that rm is not the only program which calls
C> unlink(2), and further unlink(2) is not the only way to mess your files.
C> Some people LIKE the VMS style file versioning, and I think it would be a
C> good thing to have AS AN OPTION.  For my taste, rm(1) is just fine.

Just today:

I have important source code in ~/fe, and an old backup as ~/fe.tgz.
It has been some time since I made a backup, and I plan to make
some wild changes I might need to back out - time for a backup!
OK, here goes: 'tar zxf fe.tgz fe'.  (the 'x' should be 'c')
One damn little typo, and instantly the latest code is replaced
with very old code.  Backups?  I thought I was making one!

This really should be fixed 2 ways: an undelete, and a --force
option for tar.  Overwrite is a crappy default.
--

Albert Cahalan
albert@ccs.neu.edu