Reputation: 335
Title is Description.
I just wonder there is any difference between rm -r
and rm -R
.
Linux man description is seemed like they are totally same(and one more, --recursive), but many people use -r and -R like they aren't same.
So I want to know about not only its functional difference but its practical(or conventional) difference.
Could anyone let me know about this?
Upvotes: 4
Views: 6544
Reputation: 9
The two options are equivalent, by default, rm does not remove directories. And by using the --recursive (-r or -R) option to remove each listed directory, too, along with all of its contents.
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 718678
According to the OpenGroup / POSIX specification for rm
, the -r
and -R
options are equivalent.
Source: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/rm.html
This probably applies to all modern UNIX / Linux variants.
But it wasn't always that way:
-R
option did not exist in v5 UNIX; see here, page 97. -r
. The reason for adding -R
was for compatibility with other commands that use -R
to mean recursive. (For example chmod
... where -r
means "remove read permission".)
Upvotes: 5
Reputation: 349
Its the same.
# rm --help | grep directories.
-r, -R, --recursive remove directories and their contents recursively
By default, rm does not remove directories. Use the --recursive (-r or -R)
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 17493
The man-page mentions:
-r, -R, --recursive
remove directories and their contents recursively
So, at least on my machine, it's the same.
Upvotes: 0