Re: [PATCH v2] clean: improve -n and -f implementation and documentation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I wonder do you mean:
> 
> 	/* Dry run won't remove anything, so requiring force makes no
> 	* sense. Interactive has its own means of protection, so don't
> 	* require force as well */
> 	if (dry_run || interactive)
> 		require_force = 0;
>
> 	if (require_force != 0 && !force)
>                 die_();
> ...

That is explained in a few messages after this one, so I'll wait
until you read them all before responding ;-).

Thanks.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux