On 10/13/19 3:00 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
I'm not sure if it's easy to find a set of criteria
that would work well while having minimal unexpected side effects of hiding
entries people in other systems do expect to see.
No matter what we do (even if we do nothing), there will be problems. But
On 2019-10-14 00:13, Assaf Gordon wrote:
> Also in other systems where "/tmp" is a "tmpfs",
> users might want to see how much space is available.
>
> If we hide it by default, they can of course use "df /tmp"
> or "df --all" - it's not about removing this option,
> it is just about making users'
Hello Bernhard,
On 2019-10-13 3:57 p.m., Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 2019-10-13 23:28, Paul Eggert wrote:
In any sane system there would be only
four lines of non-header output (for tmpfs etc, /, /home, and
/media/eggert/B827-D456), but df is outputting 28 lines.
What is so special about tmpfs
On 2019-10-13 3:28 p.m., Paul Eggert wrote:
[..]
I mean c'mon, here's the output of 'df' on the Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS
workstation I'm typing this particular message on. In any sane system
there would be only four lines of non-header output (for tmpfs etc, /,
/home, and /media/eggert/B827-D456), bu
On 2019-10-13 23:28, Paul Eggert wrote:
> In any sane system there would be only
> four lines of non-header output (for tmpfs etc, /, /home, and
> /media/eggert/B827-D456), but df is outputting 28 lines.
What is so special about tmpfs so that you would like to see it?
Here on my openSUSE:Tumble
On 10/13/19 2:11 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
This thread originated by a request to "clean up" the output on newer
ubuntu machines which use "snap" packages as /dev/loopN .
Let's not turn that into a drastic change
It could certainly be multiple sets of patches. But let's face it, df's utility
f
Hi all,
On 2019-10-13 2:27 p.m., Paul Eggert wrote:
On 10/13/19 2:41 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I wonder could we key (also) on used==0||available==0.
Yes, looking at the sample output I gave earlier, I'd say we could by
default drop filesystems where usage is 1% or less. That would solve the
On 10/13/19 2:41 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I wonder could we key (also) on used==0||available==0.
Yes, looking at the sample output I gave earlier, I'd say we could by default
drop filesystems where usage is 1% or less. That would solve the problem for my
workstation. This is roughly akin to t
On 11/10/2019 20:56, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 10/11/19 11:20 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
if you want to exclude nested file systems like that,
you could try:
alias df='df -x squashfs'
On my Fedora 30 workstation that option doesn't make any difference.
Regardless of whether '-x squashfs' is us
