walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:42:47 +0000, Duncan wrote: > >> "Bill Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted >> [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 05 Nov >> 2007 08:22:37 -0500: >> >>> ...How do I get to and how do I find .pan2 file so that I can rename >>> it? > ><much good advice snipped for brevity> > >> BTW, rm, cp, mv, and similar commands, all have a -i (interactive) >> switch as well. This will prompt every time the command will overwrite >> or delete an existing file. Some distributions alias particularly rm to >> rm - i for safety, so you get interactive mode by default... > >I also never rely on the installer to set up my shell environment, so I >make a point of including these lines in my .bashrc file: > >alias l='ls -laF' >alias ll='ls -laF|less' >alias mv='mv -i' >alias rm='rm -i' >alias cp='cp -i'
I really have to disagree with this, and I think Duncan alluded to the problem in the part that you snipped: One day, at the worst possible moment, you'll find yourself without those aliases. Maybe there was a typo in your .bashrc that prevented those lines from being run, maybe you've 'su -'ed to another user, maybe you're helping a co-worker typing some commands into *his* shell... In the same vein, distributors that set up those aliases by default are doing their users a huge disservice. Aliases are fine for avoiding a lot of boring typing, in particular if they implement a "new command" - like your 'l' and 'll'. They're *not* fine for *replacing* standard commands with ones that have radically different semantics. Learn to work with the system instead - 'rm' *is* dangerous for the unwary, if you can't handle that sit on your hands or make a habit of using -i, or at least create a *differently named* alias, like, uh, 'del'...:-) I was going to add an IMHO to that, but on second thought, I won't. --Per Hedeland _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
