Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%UCB)
Newsgroups: net.unix,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Make incompatible with source control?
Message-ID: <373@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 1-Nov-84 17:55:19 EST
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.373
Posted: Thu Nov  1 17:55:19 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Nov-84 20:04:05 EST
References: <2490@dartvax.UUCP> <765@ariel.UUCP> <61@pixutl.UUCP> <226@sftri.UUCP>
Reply-To: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: UCSF Computer Center
Lines: 33
Summary: 

>The underlying cause of the problem is SCCS's peculiar notion of the
>meaning of the "w" bit. It is not just "make" that doesn't understand
>this idea. Almost all other utilities (such as "cp" and "rm") believe
>that you will turn off the "w" bit if you want a file to be treated
>with extra care. SCCS believes exactly the opposite. For example, you
>have gotten several files in a directory, some with -e and some
>without.   You now accidentally do an "rm *".  What happens? The
>files you have spent hours editing are removed, but the ones you can
>easily recreate are not.
>
>Jerry Schwarz
>Bell Labs
>Summit, N.J.

I think we have a mistaken idea here.  The 'w' bit controls whether
the file is writeable.  It does NOT mean "take extra care with this
file".  The behavior you note is consistent with this meaning.

	rm	If you can't write a file, should you really be
		deleting it entirely?

	sccs, rcs
		If you don't have a file checked out for editing,
		you shouldn't be modifying the contents.  If you
		check out a file to edit it, you damn well better
		be able to write on it.

You are mistaking "rm" and "mv"'s behavior as "This file is precious".
It is really just saying "Removing this file seems strange, are you sure?"
'w' == write access.  If you want something like this, you'll have to
add a "precious" bit.

		Ken Arnold