trash-cli VS coreutils

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.

https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commit/fcfba90d0d27a1...

A summary of other changes just released in GNU coreutils 9.5 are:

* mv accepts --exchange to swap files

> some are simple like yes(1)

Not that simple: https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/src/yes.c

The -S / --split-string option[1] of /usr/bin/env is a relatively recent addition to GNU Coreutils. It's available starting from GNU Coreutils 8.30[2], released on 2018-07-01.

Beware of portability: it relies on a non-standard behavior from some operating systems. It only works for OS's that treat all the text after the first space as argument(s) to the shebanged executable; rather than just treating the whole string as an executable path (that can happen to contain spaces).

Fortunately this non-standard behavior is more the norm than the exception: it works at least on modern GNU/Linux, BSDs, and macOS.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/env-...

[2] https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/b09dc6306e7affaf...

> building a cat from scratch

> That would be an interesting project.

Here is the source code of the OpenBSD implementation of cat:

> https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/master/bin/cat/cat.c

and here of the GNU coreutils implementation:

> https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/src/cat.c

Thus: I don't think building a cat from scratch or creating a tutorial about that topic is particularly hard (even though the HN audience would likely be interested in it). :-)

the yes command, writing to /dev/null, is making IO calls, which interfere with predictable scheduling.

If you look at the source code for yes, https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/src/yes.c

it builds a buffer of output and then writes that in a for loop

  while (full_write (STDOUT_FILENO, buf, bufused) == bufused)

Looking at the source of nohup, if the execvp() of the child happens then it _must_ have already done the signal (SIGHUP, SIG_IGN) so - WTF?

This got me wondering so I went and looked and it seems like lo and behold there was actually a commit to the GNU ls source just 2 weeks ago.

https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/src/ls.c

"maint: prefer char32_t to wchar_t"

even an empty file? Yes. so now it was a file with a copyright disclaimer and nothing else. And the koan-like question comes to mind is "Can you copyright nothing?" well AT&T sure tried.

Then somebody said our programs should be well defined and not depend on a fluke of unix, which at this point was probable a good idea. so it became "exit 0"

Then somebody said we should write our system utilities in C instead of shell so it runs faster. openbsd still has a good example of how this would look.

http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/src/usr....

At some point gnu bureaucracy got involved and said all programs must support the '-h' flag. so that got added, then they said all programs must support locale so that got added. now days gnu true is an astonishing 80 lines long.

https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/src/true....

http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/humor/ATT_Copyright_true.html

> Yes, ls is maintained. Although, maintained is a very strong word. It exists.

Why would it be a strong word? Here it is, in src/ls.c: https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils

It is then packaged by tens of operating system distributions, who themselves maintain extra patchsets, some of which are then upstreamed.

It is installed and used on millions (billions?) of devices, for 3 decades.

It's a very reliable and trusty "sharp stick of metal" :)