On 11/11/2011 10:30 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > I don't like the idea of printing a byte count there when > --block-size=... takes effect. Does anyone else have an opinion? Sorry, I've lost context. Are you talking about the output of "ls -ls --block-size=1"? Currently it starts with something like "total 8642560", and then each line looks something like this:
40960 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 38484 2011-02-23 05:22 foo where the "8642560", the "40960", and the "38484" are all byte counts. Which of these three numbers are you thinking should not be a byte count when the block size is 1? And how should the --si and -h options affect that number's display?
