shell-safe-rm VS trash-cli

i ended up using shell-safe-rm plus trash-cli and my own wrapper script around rm that verifies some rules like for example the argument don't start with '/' , if i want to delete for example /home/shin/.local/somefile then the script will not let me and suggest to cd to /home/me/.local and delete from there , same if i do rm /var/somedir.

I use a script called `shell-safe-rm` [1], aliased as `rm` in interactive shells, such that I don't normally use `rm` directly. Instead of directly removing files, they are placed in the trash folder so they can be recovered if they were mistakenly deleted. Highly recommend using a script/program like this to help prevent accidental data loss.

[1] https://github.com/kaelzhang/shell-safe-rm

You could think about using trash-cli or safe-rm if you're too trigger happy with your terminal

So what's really is the difference/advantage compared to at least five other similar utilities already existing (trash-cli, shell-safe-rm, rm-trash, rmtrash, crap)? Can't really be that it uses D as the programming language. As a matter of fact why're there five utilities doing the same thing in the first place?

I meant I'm using safe-rm now but I was using another wrapper when I was younger for who knows why

There's a Freedesktop specification for trashing files that you may consider adhering to: https://specifications.freedesktop.org/trash-spec/trashspec-...

I get that writing a small utility is fun, but if it is just that (for fun), I suggest you put that into the readme. Otherwise, why should I choose your tool over something like https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli, which seems to already be distributed for the major distros? Does your implementation scratch an itch that the myriad of other implementations don't? I'm just curious.

Hard deleting was more necessary on the past when storage was so tiny and expensive, but now we not constantly fighting for space anymore. So treat a rm (and the Unix tradition as a whole) as a product of its time, move undesirable files to the trash instead, you can use this trash-cli for linux.

Not related to Docker, but use the trash-cli trash command to have the recycle bin in the terminal as well.

i ended up using shell-safe-rm plus trash-cli and my own wrapper script around rm that verifies some rules like for example the argument don't start with '/' , if i want to delete for example /home/shin/.local/somefile then the script will not let me and suggest to cd to /home/me/.local and delete from there , same if i do rm /var/somedir.

They're probably talking about something like this rather than a GUI file manager

It's a bad idea to alias rm. You will get trouble on a machine that has no alias. Use trash-cli instead. It's much safer than rm. BTW, don't alias trash as rm because they are different.

For Linux there's [trash-cli](https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli/). Doesn't seem to work for MacOS per this issue (https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli/issues/284), but it suggests to use https://hasseg.org/trash/

Use trash-cli for all your rm -rf needs!

There are a number of foss tools that work with the freedesktop trashcan concept on Linuxes/BSDs, like https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli. Bunch of desktop envs' programs also use this, so it's nearer to OS-wide standardized behavior.