Subject: bug#15926: RFE: unlink command already uses 'unlink' call; make 'rm' use 'remove' call

From: Pádraig Brady <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 01:48:31 +0000

On 11/29/2013 07:57 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Eric Blake wrote:
>> Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>>> Bob Proulx wrote:
>>> +# Exercise "rm -rf /" without the --preserve-root and --no-preserve-root option.
>>> +# Expect a non-Zero exist status.
>>> +exercise_rm_rf_root \
>>> +  && fail=1
>>
>> Maybe you should favor 'rm -r /' rather than 'rm -rf /'.  That way, even
>> if all the failsafes are bypassed, you at least have better logging of
>> what started to go wrong rather than silence.
> 
> I still think this is a very scary test and isn't worth the return on
> investment.  It is the kind of thing that makes me think I could never
> recommend building coreutils anywhere but in a throwaway chroot.
> Because the risk of a failure is just so very extremely high.  That
> would be a shame.

To summarize, it,
only runs with: make EXPENSIVE=yes check,
only runs as non root,
ensures file & dir removal bypass work in a safe context first

Do you still think it's too dangerous?

Pádraig.