[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du)
From: |
Alfred M. Szmidt |
Subject: |
Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du) |
Date: |
Thu, 16 Jan 2003 11:42:10 +0100 |
File-sizes get bigger. I have regularly files that are >=
1.000.000.000 bytes. This makes ls output a bit "difficult" to read
and the format is "jumpy" if they are mixed with files <=
999.999.999 in size.
Why not just use --human-readable? I would have a hard time reading
several lines of files that have such big sizes.
>From (fileutils)What information is listed:
`-h'
`--human-readable'
Append a size letter such as `M' for megabytes to each size.
Powers of 1024 are used, not 1000; `M' stands for 1,048,576 bytes.
Use the `--si' option if you prefer powers of 1000.
- Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Matthias Schniedermeyer, 2003/01/15
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du),
Alfred M. Szmidt <=
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Matthias Schniedermeyer, 2003/01/16
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2003/01/16
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Matthias Schniedermeyer, 2003/01/16
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2003/01/16
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Matthias Schniedermeyer, 2003/01/16
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2003/01/16
- Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du), Matthias Schniedermeyer, 2003/01/16