On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 06:38:31PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Andreas Kusalananda wrote on Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 06:09:54PM +0100:
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 05:48:44PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>
> >> +.Dl du -sh * .??* | sort -h
>
> > Why the ".??*"? That would miss
Hi Andreas,
Andreas Kusalananda wrote on Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 06:09:54PM +0100:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 05:48:44PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> +.Dl du -sh * .??* | sort -h
> Why the ".??*"? That would miss single (well, double) letter hidden
> directory names like .a, .b etc.
True, but
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 05:48:44PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> Jason McIntyre wrote on Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:26:42PM +:
>
> > i don;t think it would be such a bad thing for du to have an example or
> > two, so i'm ok with this.
> >
> > so sth like:
> >
> > Display a
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 05:48:44PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> Jason McIntyre wrote on Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:26:42PM +:
>
> > i don;t think it would be such a bad thing for du to have an example or
> > two, so i'm ok with this.
> >
> > so sth like:
> >
> > Display a
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:46:28AM -0600, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 2020, at 10:26 AM, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:12:56AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> >> Monday, 20200127 18:29-0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> >>> Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh
Hi Jason,
Jason McIntyre wrote on Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:26:42PM +:
> i don;t think it would be such a bad thing for du to have an example or
> two, so i'm ok with this.
>
> so sth like:
>
> Display a summary of files and folders in the current directory,
> sorted by size:
>
> On Jan 29, 2020, at 10:26 AM, Jason McIntyre wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:12:56AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
>> Monday, 20200127 18:29-0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
>>> Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s
>>> -h options will automatically select the best
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:12:56AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> Monday, 20200127 18:29-0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> > Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s
> > -h options will automatically select the best suffix and sort(1)'s
> > -h will sort first using the suffix
Monday, 20200127 18:29-0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s
> -h options will automatically select the best suffix and sort(1)'s
> -h will sort first using the suffix then the numerical value.
Thanks! I didn't know about "sort -h". That
On Wed, Jan 29 2020 12:25:34 +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> Lauri Tirkkonen(la...@hacktheplanet.fi) on 2020.01.29 01:31:56 +0200:
> > On Tue, Jan 28 2020 18:03:19 +0100, Florian Obser wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:58:40AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020
Lauri Tirkkonen(la...@hacktheplanet.fi) on 2020.01.29 01:31:56 +0200:
> On Tue, Jan 28 2020 18:03:19 +0100, Florian Obser wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:58:40AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:29:39 -0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can't you achieve what
On Tue, Jan 28 2020 18:03:19 +0100, Florian Obser wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:58:40AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:29:39 -0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> >
> > > Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s -h
> > > options will automatically
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:58:40AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:29:39 -0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
>
> > Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s -h
> > options will automatically select the best suffix and sort(1)'s -h
> > will sort first using
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:29:39 -0500, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s -h
> options will automatically select the best suffix and sort(1)'s -h
> will sort first using the suffix then the numerical value.
Yes, I forgot about "sort -h". Old
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:00:39 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> There are several commands which have a -k flag for scaling to
> kilobytes.
>
> For example:
> df
> du
> ls
> pstat
> quot
> swapctl
>
> Going down the list of unit names kmgtpezy some of these flags are
> already used. So it would be
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:34:56PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> Florian Obser(flor...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.27 19:57:41 +0100:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:33:49AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:05:41 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Jan 26,
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:33:49 -0700, Todd C. Miller
wrote:
> For example, I often do:
>
> du -sk * | sort -rn | head
>
> to see the largest disk users.
>
> However, output in kilobytes is less useful than it used to be due
> to larger files now being common.
Can't you achieve what you
Florian Obser(flor...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.27 19:57:41 +0100:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:33:49AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:05:41 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:33AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> > > > This diff teaches du(1)
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:33:49AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:05:41 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:33AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> > > This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
> > > This brings us in line
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:05:41 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:33AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> > This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
> > This brings us in line with implementations in the other BSDs, Linux,
> > and Illumos.
>
> Why
Monday, 20200127 10:05+1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:33AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> > This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
> > This brings us in line with implementations in the other BSDs, Linux,
> > and Illumos.
>
> Why is it
Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:33AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> > This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
> > This brings us in line with implementations in the other BSDs, Linux,
> > and Illumos.
>
> Why is it needed? -k is required by
On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:33AM -0500, David Goerger wrote:
> This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
> This brings us in line with implementations in the other BSDs, Linux,
> and Illumos.
Why is it needed? -k is required by POSIX, adding arguments for
Maybe the manpage text could be better, but i'll leave that to jmc@
ok benno@
David Goerger(da...@goerger.info) on 2020.01.26 11:59:33 -0500:
> This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
> This brings us in line with implementations in the other BSDs, Linux,
> and
This diff teaches du(1) the -m flag, report disk usage in megabytes.
This brings us in line with implementations in the other BSDs, Linux,
and Illumos.
Other base utilities where this flag might be useful include df(1)
and quot(8), although it doesn't appear to be universally adopted
among the
25 matches
Mail list logo
