Re: ls -s vs. du (was: Re: [dev] [st] font fallback)

From: Strake <>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:02:09 -0500

On 06/01/2013, pancake <> wrote:
> Didnt checked, but i guess that ls -s show size in bytes and du in block
> bytes, which depends on filesystem.

Nope. Both show size in blocks [1].

It seems proper to do so in ls alone, with a flag of whether to add
sizes of all files below; thus we could drop du. One may argue that
the job of ls is not to add sizes, but now we have 2 utilities what
list files, which loses.

[1], du)
Received on Sun Jan 06 2013 - 15:02:09 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Jan 06 2013 - 15:12:04 CET