[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k
From: |
Linda Walsh |
Subject: |
bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k? |
Date: |
Fri, 31 May 2013 18:02:00 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird |
in Coreutils 8.21.1.1 (x86_64) on snoozy
When I type in ls -k, I get a small listing (filenames only horizontally)
(and no sizes).
When I type in ls -lk, I get a long listing -- but it isn't using K, but
bytes.
:-(.
Why k no worky?
I'd think:
1) ls -k should display the file size in k as ls -s display blocks.
2) ls -sk would display allocated size in k (which it may do?)
and
3)ls -l would display sizes in k.
Am I missing something about why 'k' doesn't work in 1 & 3?
Actually ls -s acts like ls -sk -- doesn't display blocks but -k-
Isn't a block 512B?
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?,
Linda Walsh <=
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Pádraig Brady, 2013/06/01
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Linda A. Walsh, 2013/06/01
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/01
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Linda Walsh, 2013/06/01
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Eric Blake, 2013/06/01
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Linda Walsh, 2013/06/01
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Paul Eggert, 2013/06/02
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Linda Walsh, 2013/06/02
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Eric Blake, 2013/06/04
- bug#14525: ls -k produced no size, ls -lk lists in bytes? What's up w/k?, Linda Walsh, 2013/06/06