adammcclure119 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 2 19:07:39 UTC 2017
On 12/02/2017 10:59 AM, Xen wrote:
> Ralf Mardorf schreef op 02-12-2017 16:23:
>> On Sat, 02 Dec 2017 12:48:39 +0100, Xen wrote:
>>> Ralf Mardorf schreef op 02-12-2017 9:31:
>>>> CAUTION: Note that shred relies on a very important assumption:
>>>> that the file system overwrites data in place. This is the
>>>> traditional way to do things, but many modern file system designs do
>>>> not satisfy this assumption.
>>> If I recall correctly the next piece says that this only applies to
>>> Ext3/4 when journal mode is DATA, which is not the default ;-).
>> While this is correct, it's still worth to mention it.
>>> Thank you for creating noise ;-).
>> I wouldn't call such a notice noise. This notice - incompletely quoting
>> the manpage - is indeed biased, but since I provided the pointer to the
>> extraction of the manpage, the reader is free to read the complete
>> manpage. Just mentioning that the history could be shred without giving
>> a hint to pitfalls, is much more biased and furthermore it's dangerous.
> If you hadn't made a biased statement, I would not have had an issue.
> Because then you don't create the impression that this is a very serious
> problem, when it isn't.
> Creating fear in people for no reason, why do you do that?
How is mentioning a warning that is halfway down on the manpage
"creating fear in people for no reason"?
It was saying to be careful with the command, not creating fear.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the ubuntu-users