Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!elroy!cit-vax!ucla-cs!rutgers!iuvax!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!osiris.cso.uiuc.edu!goldfain From: goldfain@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng Subject: Re: Request for human interface des Message-ID: <10300004@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu> Date: Thu, 3-Dec-87 03:58:00 EST Article-I.D.: osiris.10300004 Posted: Thu Dec 3 03:58:00 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 9-Dec-87 06:01:30 EST References: <6304@ncoast.UUCP> Lines: 16 Nf-ID: #R:ncoast.UUCP:6304:osiris.cso.uiuc.edu:10300004:000:1085 Nf-From: osiris.cso.uiuc.edu!goldfain Dec 3 02:58:00 1987 Okay, we've kicked the "write-permission vs. rm" issue around for a while. What do people think of the idea of having a "delete permission" bit in addition to the 3 unix permissions of read, write, and execute ? One way to protect important files from "rm" would then be to deny this permission. I realize most systems don't make this distinction, since to the programmer's mind, write permission and delete permission are about equivalent. What this discussion has highlighted however, is that there is a subtle difference. Programmers do not often trash important files while editing them. If they do, most good editors have automatic backup schemes that allow the programmer to recover from his error. And even at the worst, only one file is usually zapped in this way (and after that NONE for quite a period of time, right?) But a wayward character on file-management level commands can trash immense amounts. So in practice there is a difference. - Mark Goldfain