I guess that's fine..I only patched this up in frustration...
If people will agree with destroydb -i to be interactive one, I'll change
it...
=+=------------------------/\---------------------------------=+=
Igor Natanzon |**| E-mail: igor@sba.miami.edu
=+=------------------------\/---------------------------------=+=
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
> How about "destroydb -i" a la "rm -i" to allow someone to alias the
> definition to protect themselves without changing the default behavior
> for everyone? (Rather than "destroydb -y" to suppress the confirmation
> message?)
>
> - Tom
>
------------------------------