On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 09:20:51AM +0000, Charles Forsyth wrote:
>[...] On Linux, I
> never use ls -R, partly because I'm
> running p9p's ls, but mainly because the default format of /bin/ls -R is
> amazingly useless (even worse than I remembered).
I wasn't refering to whatever implementation (I don't use ls -R either
since the output is simply not parsable). I was simply using -R, since
-r is already taken.
What I meant was the size of the file is already given via ls(1). So
a recursive output that make sense and fit a manipulation via join(1)
(to combine a srv/qid) and sort and uniq etc. could do the trick.
Since ls(1) gives the size of the file; since du(1) can not really or at
least not always in an arbitrary context tells the "real" occupation of
disk size, is not ls(1) enough?
--
Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
http://www.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
