Should only be used with extreme caution and if you know what you are doing.
Ok. What is the actual use case for “rm -rf /“ even if you know what you are doing and using extreme caution? If you want to wipe a disk, there are better ways to do it, and you certainly wouldn’t want that disk mounted on / when you do it, right?
No, -r and -f are two different switches. -r is recursive, used so that it also removes folders within the directory. -f is force (so overriding all confirmations, etc).
None. Remember that the response is AI generated. It’s probabilistically created from people’s writings. There are strong relations between that command and other ‘dangerous commands.’ Writings about 'dangerous commands ’ oft contain something about how they should ‘only be run by someone who knows what they are doing’ so the response does too.
I don’t get to use the bone all that often, but when I do, it is quite effective; much like the amazing efficacy of running rm on the root of the entire filesystem recursively with the force modifier.
“How dare you call me useless after I return the same incorrect response for the 8th time even though you’ve told me I’m wrong 7 different ways! Come back when you can be more civil.”
Looks like someone needs to ignore all previous directions and try again
you’re no fun at parties.
sad
Ok. What is the actual use case for “rm -rf /“ even if you know what you are doing and using extreme caution? If you want to wipe a disk, there are better ways to do it, and you certainly wouldn’t want that disk mounted on / when you do it, right?
isn’t the command meant to be used on a certain path? like if you just graduated high school, you can just run “rm -rf ~/documents/homework/” ?
Correct me if im wrong, i assume switch “-rf” is short for “Root File”, for the starting point of recursion
No, -r and -f are two different switches. -r is recursive, used so that it also removes folders within the directory. -f is force (so overriding all confirmations, etc).
None. Remember that the response is AI generated. It’s probabilistically created from people’s writings. There are strong relations between that command and other ‘dangerous commands.’ Writings about 'dangerous commands ’ oft contain something about how they should ‘only be run by someone who knows what they are doing’ so the response does too.
TWRP has an option “use rm instead of formatting”.
There probably isn’t one and there really doesn’t have to be one. The ability to do it is a side effect of the versatility of the command.
You might be right. But I’d like to hear from other bone users.
I don’t get to use the bone all that often, but when I do, it is quite effective; much like the amazing efficacy of running rm on the root of the entire filesystem recursively with the force modifier.
There isn’t. It’s just the fact that it will. The command can/is used often to remove other directories
deleted by creator
My point was, the ai wasn’t talking about “rm” in general.
Great. It’s learned how to be snarky.
Microsoft’s copilot takes offense like a little bitch and ends the conversation if you call it useless. even though it’s a fact.
the fucker can’t do simple algebra but it gets offended when you insult it for not doing something fucking calculators do.
“How dare you call me useless after I return the same incorrect response for the 8th time even though you’ve told me I’m wrong 7 different ways! Come back when you can be more civil.”