Paul Eggert wrote:
Shouldn't that be 'users "curse" rmdir'? All rmdir implementations behave that way; GNU rmdir is no different. It's not clear to me why 'rmdir /foo/a /bar/b' should by default reject the attempt to remove '/bar/b' merely because it's on a different file system from '/foo/a'.
---- Then why have the option for 'rm'?
