GNU bug report logs - #49994
upgrade: have "-s" of 'ls' display alloc'd sizes for specified "--block-size"

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: L A Walsh <coreutils <at> tlinx.org>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: Coreutils <bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#49994: upgrade: have "-s" of 'ls' display alloc'd sizes for
 specified "--block-size"
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2021 16:13:12 -0700

(reposting w/list+bugdb)

Hmm...  for libc.so, ls -l shows 253 bytes
for -s, it shows '4' 
and w/block-size=1, it shows
4096...

My LS_OPTIONS is
LS_OPTIONS=-N --color=tty -T 0

-N for quoting and -T for no tabs

my version: rpm -qf /usr/bin/ls
coreutils-8.23-2.3.2.x86_64

may not be as current as yours, but it would be odd if it changed and
you didn't know...


Ishtar:/usr/lib64> command ls -lgG libc.so
-rw-r--r-- 1 253 Mar 11 11:22 libc.so
Ishtar:/usr/lib64> command ls -s libc.so
4 libc.so
Ishtar:/usr/lib64> command ls --block-size=1 -s libc.so
4096 libc.so


On 2021/08/11 00:40, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 8/10/21 11:56 PM, L A Walsh wrote:
>> Perhaps the '-s' option in ls could pay attention to
>> the user-specified block-size?
> 
> Doesn't it already do that?
> 
> $ ls -s libc.so
> 12192 libc.so
> $ ls -s --block-size=1 libc.so
> 12484608 libc.so


On 2021/08/11 00:40, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 8/10/21 11:56 PM, L A Walsh wrote:
>> Perhaps the '-s' option in ls could pay attention to
>> the user-specified block-size?
> 
> Doesn't it already do that?
> 
> $ ls -s libc.so
> 12192 libc.so
> $ ls -s --block-size=1 libc.so
> 12484608 libc.so

Previous Next

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