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