GNU bug report logs - #18648
rm -f with no file operands fails on old BSD systems

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 18648 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 18648 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Richard Hansen <rhansen <at> bbn.com>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org, austin-group-l <austin-group-l <at> opengroup.org>
Subject: rm -f with no file operands fails on old BSD systems
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 22:51:45 -0400

Hi all,

A friend reported this to me:

> $ ./configure
> ...
> usage: rm [-f|-i] [-dPRrvW] file ...
> Oops!
> 
> Your 'rm' program seems unable to run without file operands specified
> on the command line, even when the '-f' option is present.  This is contrary
> to the behaviour of most rm programs out there, and not conforming with
> the upcoming POSIX standard: <http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=542>
> 
> Please tell bug-automake <at> gnu.org about your system, including the value
> of your $PATH and any error possibly output before this message.  This
> can help us improve future automake versions.
> 
> Aborting the configuration process, to ensure you take notice of the issue.
> 
> You can download and install GNU coreutils to get an 'rm' implementation
> that behaves properly: <http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/>.
> 
> If you want to complete the configuration process using your problematic
> 'rm' anyway, export the environment variable ACCEPT_INFERIOR_RM_PROGRAM
> to "yes", and re-run configure.
> 
> configure: error: Your 'rm' program is bad, sorry.
> $ uname -a
> NetBSD example.com 4.0_STABLE NetBSD 4.0_STABLE (GENERIC) #4: Wed Mar 14 13:59:06 EDT 2012  root <at> example.com:/usr/obj/sparc/sys/arch/sparc/compile/GENERIC sparc
> $ /bin/rm -f
> usage: rm [-f|-i] [-dPRrvW] file ...
> $ echo $?
> 1

Digging around in various CVS/Subversion repositories, it looks like
there are many old (but perhaps not yet museum-worthy) *BSD versions
that behave this way:

  * NetBSD 4.x and older (5.0 released April 2009).  see: [1] [2]
  * FreeBSD 3.1.x and older (3.2 released May 1999).  see: [3] [4]
  * OpenBSD 2.x and older (3.0 released Dec 2001).  see [5]

Given this, I wonder if POSIX bug #542 [6] should be revisited. Perhaps
that bug should change the wording to "unspecified" for Issue 7 TC2, and
we can file a new bug report to adopt the wording currently in #542 for
Issue 8.  Thoughts?

Thanks,
Richard

[1] http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/bin/rm/rm.c#rev1.47
[2] http://gnats.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=38754
[3] https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=44282
[4] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10252
[5] http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/bin/rm/rm.c#rev1.10
[6] http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=542

Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Philip Guenther <guenther <at> gmail.com>
To: Richard Hansen <rhansen <at> bbn.com>
Cc: bug-automake <at> gnu.org, austin-group-l <austin-group-l <at> opengroup.org>
Subject: Re: rm -f with no file operands fails on old BSD systems
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 20:00:12 -0700

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Richard Hansen <rhansen <at> bbn.com> wrote:
...
> Digging around in various CVS/Subversion repositories, it looks like
> there are many old (but perhaps not yet museum-worthy) *BSD versions
> that behave this way:
>
>   * NetBSD 4.x and older (5.0 released April 2009).  see: [1] [2]
>   * FreeBSD 3.1.x and older (3.2 released May 1999).  see: [3] [4]
>   * OpenBSD 2.x and older (3.0 released Dec 2001).  see [5]

Speaking on behalf of the OpenBSD project: OpenBSD 2.x should be
considered dead, buried, rotted, and worthy of derision.  History is
history: useful to study, but if you try to live there you will die of
horrific diseases.  Do not hold up progress on the basis that you'll
trip over a 12+ year old release.


Philip Guenther
guenther <at> openbsd.org

Message #11 received at 18648 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Philip Guenther <guenther <at> gmail.com>, 
 Richard Hansen <rhansen <at> bbn.com>
Cc: 18648 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, austin-group-l <at> opengroup.org
Subject: Re: bug#18648: rm -f with no file operands fails on old BSD systems
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 11:34:16 +0100

tags 18648 + wontfix
stop

On 10/07/2014 05:00 AM, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Richard Hansen <rhansen <at> bbn.com> wrote:
> ...
>> Digging around in various CVS/Subversion repositories, it looks like
>> there are many old (but perhaps not yet museum-worthy) *BSD versions
>> that behave this way:
>>
>>    * NetBSD 4.x and older (5.0 released April 2009).  see: [1] [2]
>>    * FreeBSD 3.1.x and older (3.2 released May 1999).  see: [3] [4]
>>    * OpenBSD 2.x and older (3.0 released Dec 2001).  see [5]
>
> Speaking on behalf of the OpenBSD project: OpenBSD 2.x should be
> considered dead, buried, rotted, and worthy of derision.  History is
> history: useful to study, but if you try to live there you will die of
> horrific diseases.  Do not hold up progress on the basis that you'll
> trip over a 12+ year old release.
>
> Philip Guenther
> guenther <at> openbsd.org
>

I belatedly agree with Philip.  Even the last "free" BSD release to be
affected (NetBSD 4.0) is 5 and a half years old, and in the fast-moving
scenario of today's computing that sounds like a different geological
era, IMHO. We should not allow the habits the autotools community had
to develop "under duress" during the Unix wars period to affect today's
progress.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.