this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
241 points (84.1% liked)

linuxmemes

21222 readers
100 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
    • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
    • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

    • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    poopsmith@lemmy.world
    zephyr@lemmy.world
    rtxn@lemmy.world
    241
    Foolishness (lemmy.world)
    submitted 1 year ago by spigeon@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
    34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] narshee@iusearchlinux.fyi 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    You can do echo */ and echo /* to see how they expand. Also rm -rf / already is enough without the * as it already is recursive

    [–] fl42v@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

    * is there to bypass the need for --no-preserve-root

    [–] second@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    rm -rf / needs --no-preserve-root on GNU coreutils, I think.

    [–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

    why do they even have that lever

    [–] second@feddit.uk 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Originally, rm would merrily nuke your whole filesystem if you told it to. At some point, someone thought that was a pretty stupid default behaviour, so they added that flag to change the default to not nuke your entire filesystem. However, they made the change backwards compatible in case someone still needed the old behaviour. I can imagine in a container or throwaway environment, it might be vaguely reasonable to expect to be able the blat /.

    See also:

    Unix gives you just enough rope to hang yourself -- and then a couple of more feet, just to be sure.

    -- Eric Allman

    [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I'm aware of how recursive force remove works. I'm just kidding around.

    [–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

    Anybody brave enough to tell the MS rep this on patch night??

    (You have backups, right?)