|
- What is the difference between rm -r and rm -f? - Super User
What do you mean they give the same result? rm -r emptydir removes that directory, rm -f emptydir does not These are two completely different command line options, each doing whatever its documentation says is doing
- find: -exec rm {} \; vs. -delete - why is the former widely . . .
The -exec rm is not recommendable on many systems, for reasons I gave - lack of support, or a desire to restrict process count "widely recommended" does not mean ideal for all circumstances, and failing to address that assumption seems irresponsible
- rm: cannot remove `dir-name: Directory not empty - Super User
rm: cannot remove `dir-name': Directory not empty Ask Question Asked 1 year, 11 months ago Modified 1 year, 11 months ago
- What is the equivalent of rm -rf in Powershell? - Super User
As we all know, on a *nix system, rm -rf some_directory removes some_directory and all files beneath it recursively, without asking for confirmation What is the equivalent of this command in Powershell?
- linux - Why does it take a long time to delete big files if `rm` can be . . .
I know that that it takes a long time to remove a big file because big files have larger number of blocks to be unlinked But when I interrupt an ongoing rm of a large file, the file is still gone
- Whats the equivalent to rm -rf with Windows command?
What's the equivalent to 'rm -rf' with Windows command? Ask Question Asked 15 years, 1 month ago Modified 6 years, 10 months ago
- What does rm -rf do? - Super User
The rm command removes files The -r option will perform a recursive removal and the -f option will remove files without prompting you to confirm that you wish to have them removed, even if you would otherwise be prompted as to whether you wish to remove them due to the files permissions E g , if you type rm -rf somedirectory, the command will remove all files and subdirectories beneath the
- macos - Trying to delete directory with rm -rf, but get message that . . .
rm -rf dirname from a login on the network disk server properly removed the directory along with its contents So, there's another answer for what it's worth; another potential solution to this problem if it should appear for anyone in conjunction with a network disk
|
|
|