Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Computational complexity of rm & ls
Message-ID: <9852@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 14 Mar 89 02:29:44 GMT
References: <9000012@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <4461@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <1541@zen.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 6

In article <1541@zen.UUCP> frank@zen.co.uk (Frank Wales) writes:
>Maybe adding a '-A' (for All, harder to type than '-a') option to rm would
>be justified.  No doubt doing so would break jillions of scripts.  :-)

New options aren't likely to break existing scripts.
However, I don't understand the problem.  "rm -r ." seems sufficient.