ls and human readable format

Gilles Espinasse g.esp at free.fr
Mon Feb 28 20:16:21 UTC 2011


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harald Becker" <ralda at gmx.de>
To: "Tito" <farmatito at tiscali.it>
Cc: <busybox at busybox.net>
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 9:39 AM
Subject: Re: ls and human readable format


> Hallo Tito!
>
> > I just noticed the following, using "ls -lh" the size should display in
human readable format, but they don't.
>
> > Seems the attached patch fixes it, but maybe breaks something else?.
Denys could you take a look at it as I've fixed it more by esthetical
intuition than by understanding that horrible enum ;-).
>
> That patch works for the human format size too, but beside this we need
> someone looking deeper at this enum. Other option seem to fail too, got
> at least trouble with the -s (sizes in blocks option). In addition there
> seems to be any option, that invokes the output size in blocks format,
> but I can't reproduce it quickly (needs checking all options).
>
> But not only Busybox fails with this, the ls from coreutils (Version
> 8.10) fails at the size in blocks option too. Can anybody verify this?
> Does anybody have contact to the coreutils guys and can report this
failure?
>
> --
> Harald
>
I report issue to coreutils when I find them.
What fail with coreutils-8.10 ls?
It look to work for me (x86 32bits) with ls -sh
I checked to have same behavior in debian coreutils-6.10 ls and 8.10

Gilles



More information about the busybox mailing list