GNU bug report logs - #8676
ls --si --human-readable, MB vs M

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Peggy Russell <prusselltechgroup <at> gmail.com>
Subject: bug#8676: closed (Re: bug#8676: ls --si --human-readable, MB vs M)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:37:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your bug report

#8676: ls --si --human-readable, MB vs M

which was filed against the coreutils package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 8676 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
8676: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8676
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
To: Peggy Russell <prusselltechgroup <at> gmail.com>, 8676-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#8676: ls --si --human-readable, MB vs M
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 13:04:00 +0200

tags 8676 + notabug
thanks

Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 05/16/11 01:48, Peggy Russell wrote:
>> Shouldn't the `ls -l --si` output (#2 or #4) be display as 60MB vs 60M
>
> That would be more consistent, yes.  But it would also take up an extra
> column of output, and those columns are precious.

Just marking this issue as "done".

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Peggy Russell <prusselltechgroup <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: ls --si --human-readable, MB vs M
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 03:48:40 -0500

Hi,

From: man:ls
............................................................................
SIZE may be (or may be an integer optionally followed by) one of following:
kB 1000, K 1024, MB 1000*1000, M 1024*1024, and so on for G, T, P, E, Z, Y.
............................................................................

From: info:/coreutils/Block size
............................................................................
...
With human-readable formats, output sizes are followed by a size letter such
as `M' for megabytes. `BLOCK_SIZE=human-readable' uses powers of 1024; `M'
stands for 1,048,576 bytes. `BLOCK_SIZE=si' is similar, but uses powers of
1000 and appends `B'; `MB' stands for 1,000,000 bytes.
...

 `MB'
      megabyte: 10^6 = 1,000,000.

 `M'
 `MiB'
      mebibyte: 2^20 = 1,048,576.
............................................................................

Commands:
............................................................................
#1 ls -l  file.ogg
-r--r--r-- 1 user group 59802045 2010-07-01 20:37 file.ogg

#2 ls -l --si  file.ogg
-r--r--r-- 1 user group 60M 2010-07-01 20:37 file.ogg

#3 ls -l --human-readable  file.ogg
-r--r--r-- 1 user group 58M 2010-07-01 20:37 file.ogg

#4 ls -l --block-size=si  file.ogg
-r--r--r-- 1 user group 60M 2010-07-01 20:37 file.ogg

#5 ls -l --block-size=human-readable  file.ogg
r--r--r-- 1 user group 58M 2010-07-01 20:37 file.ogg
............................................................................

Given the above:

SI Decimal (Matches #2):
59802045/(1000*1000) = roundup(59.80,0) = 60 MB

IEC Binary (Matches #3):
59802045/(1024*1024) = roundup(57.03,0) = 58 M

Shouldn't the `ls -l --si` output (#2 or #4) be display as 60MB vs 60M or
am I just missing a `ls` option for formatting the different display units?

Thank you.
Peggy Russell

Previous Next

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