GNU bug report logs - #18503
[bug-report] the output of ls -lsh

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Gemfield <gemfield <at> civilnet.cn>
To: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
Cc: "18503 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <18503 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, "Linda A. Walsh" <coreutils <at> tlinx.org>
Subject: bug#18503: [bug-report] the output of ls -lsh
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 22:39:13 +0800

Yes, it is exactly same as bug#17838. Is -lsh  makes me have a misunderstanding that this file has a size of 4.0K blocks (4000*1024B)
.
Thanks.

发自Gemfield 的 iPhone

> 在 2014年9月19日，上午8:41，Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com> 写道：
> 
> unmerge 17553 18503
> forcemerge 17838 18503
> stop
> 
>> On 09/19/2014 01:05 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> unarchive 17553
>> forcemerge 17553 18503
>> stop
>> 
>>> On 09/19/2014 12:17 AM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
>>> gemfield wrote:
>>>>   Hi,
>>>>   I am running ls -lsh on kubuntu 14.04, here is the output:
>>>>   gemfield <at> gemfield-ThinkPad-Edge:~$ ls -ls
>>>>   4 -rw-rw-r-- 1 gemfield gemfield    9  9 18 23:12 test
>>>>   gemfield <at> gemfield-ThinkPad-Edge:~$ ls -lsh
>>>>   4.0K -rw-rw-r-- 1 gemfield gemfield    9  9 18 23:12 test
>>>>   the "4" colored by green means 4 blocks, so why becomes 4.0K blocks
>>>>     when add -h option to ls -ls?
>>> 4  * 1K blocks = 4.0K blocks.
>>                       ^^^^^^ -> bytes
>> 
>> I think the ambiguity is that there is no unit output.
>> With the human output options, bytes are the implicit unit rather than blocks.
>> 
>> The documentation on the human output options does mention that
>> bytes are being specified rather than blocks:
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/coreutils.html#Block-size
>> 
>> Ideally you're right that we should be outputting 4KB
>> or more accurately 4KiB, though due to backward compat concerns
>> we use the less verbose but more ambiguous format.
>> 
>> For more explicit conversions you can run ls through the
>> numfmt utility as described at http://bugs.gnu.org/17553
>> In fact the issues are much the same as with that bug
>> so I'll merge them.
> 
> Actually http://bugs.gnu.org/17838 is essentially the same issue.
> The resolution there was to mention how -h impacts -s in the man page,
> and that improvement was released in coreutils 8.23
> 
> thanks,
> Pádraig.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.