[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#13902: BUG : Option -k / --kibibytes no longer works with ls
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
bug#13902: BUG : Option -k / --kibibytes no longer works with ls |
Date: |
Fri, 08 Mar 2013 06:06:17 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130219 Thunderbird/17.0.3 |
tag 13902 notabug
thanks
On 03/08/2013 01:09 AM, Sebastien wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is to tell you that option -k (--kibibytes) no longer works with
> the ls command.
Thanks for the report. However, according to NEWS, this was a bug fix
of coreutils 8.15:
ls's -k option no longer affects how ls -l outputs file sizes.
It now affects only the per-directory block counts written by -l,
and the sizes written by -s. This is for compatibility with BSD
and with POSIX 2008. Because -k is no longer equivalent to
--block-size=1KiB, a new long option --kibibyte stands for -k.
[bug introduced in coreutils-4.5.4]
>
> Sample output:
>
> $ ls -l
> total 81644
> drwxrwxr-x. 23 root root 4096 Dec 3 20:22 linux-3.7-rc8
> -rw-rw-r--. 1 seb seb 83581254 Dec 5 21:26 linux-3.7-rc8.tar.bz2
> drwx------. 2 root root 16384 May 9 2012 lost+found
>
> $ ls -lk
> total 81644
> drwxrwxr-x. 23 root root 4096 Dec 3 20:22 linux-3.7-rc8
> -rw-rw-r--. 1 seb seb 83581254 Dec 5 21:26 linux-3.7-rc8.tar.bz2
> drwx------. 2 root root 16384 May 9 2012 lost+found
This is the correct behavior required by POSIX when using 'ls -k'. You
were relying on an alternate behavior, where it was a bug that -k
exposed the alternate behavior; but that alternate behavior is still
available to you if you use the proper spelling:
ls -l --block-size=k
Therefore, I'm closing this as not a bug. Feel free to add further
comments or questions.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature