Try testing it on local filesystem (like ext3). Make sure you have a lot of files and lots of subfolders so they make up the difference.
** Description changed: Binary package hint: gnome-utils I've noticed the baobab (aka Disk Usage Analyzer) is not reporting sizes of directories correctly. I my particular case all scanned subfolders are readable (and even writable) for user, so that is not a problem. - From what I can tell, it calculates the size by scanning it's largest sub-folders and summing them up. - This however leads to errors, when there exist large number of smaller directories of files one or more levels down. The calculations apparently discard these as unimportant, yet those numbers add up and may make quite a difference. + After a few tests I concluded bug is within the gnome-utils package of versions 2.24.1 and up. I tried compiling number of versions on the same system, and it showed that older (2.20.0.1) have no such bug, only later versions. (A regression bug?) + Anyway bug in dependent libraries is unlikely, cause in test all versions were linked against the same external libraries. - I've attached a screenshot to this bug. - Focus your attention on "misc" size in baobab vs. nautilus. - And also "windisk" size against Volume size in misc's properties. (there is only 5 GiB free) + There are bunch of screenshots added showing the bug. + Most screenshots show bug on NTFS patritions, however I confirmed the same bug also on ext3 - so it is also unlikely to be filesystem specific. - I think the size calculation must be adjusted (even if that would mean longer scanning times). - Accuracy is more important than speed. - - Affected platform: - Ubuntu 8.10 (Interpid) with Linux 2.6.27-11 generic amd64 - Baobab 2.24.1 from gnome-utils package 2.24.1-0ubuntu1 + Affected: + gnome-utils baobab 2.24.1 and later (at least up to 2.26.0) + on all tested platforms (those currently being x86 and x86_64) -- Baobab reports incorrect sizes https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/341141 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
