ls (is the result in bytes)

[Manuales]

Hi,
i would like to know what is the size of the result after i run the command "ls -l"

Example:
$ ls -lrt prueba
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ftphr sapsys2 21 Feb 26 12:58 prueba

is "21" in bytes? if so, how can i run ls to get the value in Mb?

please let me know.
Thanks.
Dma.

[James R. Ferguson · Accepted solution]

Hi:

Yes that value "21" has the units of characters. If you want to convert this to MB, you could do:

# ls -l | awk '{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024/1024);print}'

Regards!

...JRF...

[Dennis Handly]

>is "21" in bytes?

Of course.
If you want it in Mb, you will have to write a script:
ll -rt prueba | awk '
NF >= 9 {
print $1, $2, $3, $4, $5/(1024*1024), $6, $7, $8, $9, $10, $11
next
}
{
print $0
}'

[Manuales]

and , what about Kb? how can i do that?
only 1 time: 1024?

[James R. Ferguson]

Hi (again) Manuales:

> and , what about Kb? how can i do that?

Yes:

# ls -l | awk '{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'

Regards!

...JRF...

[Manuales]

Hi,
when i run:
ls -l | awk '{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5);print}'

the result is:
how can i gent 27.00 ?

total 32 0.00
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ftphr sapsys2 20.00 Mar 5 16:33 file1
-rw-rw-r-- 1 ftphr sapsys2 7.00 Mar 5 16:33 file2

[James R. Ferguson]

Hi (again):

Yes, we should skip the "total" line at the head of the list:

# ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'

...converts to KB...

Regards!

...JRF...

[Manuales]

thanks ....
I have a question, if i run:
$ ls -lR | awk '{ sum += $5 } END { print sum }'

I got:
1.26335e+08

if i run:
$ ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'

I got: total 155152 (KB)

is the same both cases? i mean, the result (numbers) are different .... how can i explain that?

[OldSchool]

example one had:

ls -lR | awk '{ sum += $5 } END { print sum }'

example two had:

ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'

the "-R" in example one caused it to list the sizes of all the files in all the subdirectories, while the second didn't have that option.

also notice that the second example got rid of the "total" line, although this should not change the results.

Basically, you appear to have run the test with different sets of data!

[OldSchool]

Note also the following:

example one totals the sizes of all the files in the list, as in:

ls -lR | awk '{ sum += $5 } END { print sum }'
5912633



example two converts / displays each file to KB and displays that in the list:

ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'
total 668
-rwxr----- 1 root root 0.00 Feb 23 12:26 abc
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.73 Dec 26 16:05 add.hosts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.72 Dec 26 19:50 anaconda-ks.cfg
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4.00 Feb 25 10:26 c2
drwx------ 3 root root 4.00 Dec 26 19:57 Desktop
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 120.00 Dec 30 14:07 examples.tar
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 0.04 Feb 27 15:18 fsm
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0.10 Mar 2 15:54 fsm1
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 0.13 Mar 2 16:11 fsm1.sh
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0.10 Mar 2 14:45 fsm2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0.03 Feb 5 15:27 fsma1
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0.52 Feb 5 15:25 fsmawk
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 0.16 Feb 19 16:27 fsm.sh
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 46.62 Dec 26 19:50 install.log
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5.10 Dec 26 19:50 install.log.syslog
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4.00 Jan 9 10:34 sudo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 423.72 Dec 26 15:28 tzdata-2008i-1.el2_1.noarch.rpm

[Manuales]

OldSchool, you are completely RIGHT ...

So, why it is different:

$ ls -l | awk '{ sum += $5 } END { print sum }'
RESULT: 7.94204e+07

$ ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'
RESULT: total 155152

[James R. Ferguson]

Hi Manuales:

You asked:

So, why it is different:

$ ls -l | awk '{ sum += $5 } END { print sum }'
RESULT: 7.94204e+07

$ ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'
RESULT: total 155152

...

In the first case we summed *characters*.

In the second case we simply passed through without converion the "total" line in the list head. The UNITS of this value are 512-character BLOCKS. Hence, 155152*512 = 79437824 =~ 7.94204e+07

Regards!

...JRF...

[OldSchool]

$ ls -l | awk '/^total/ {print;next};{$5=sprintf("%6.2f",$5/1024);print}'
RESULT: total 155152

I take it in the above you calculated a total by hand ('cause it sure didn't print it).

if so, lots of small files could be an issue i suppose, but w/o seeing the directory listing *before* it gets run thru the various awks, its hard to tell

[Manuales]

so, wha is the best option to get the space used?
i mean, i have to get a size report of different paths , my boss needs to know how much we are using in KB.

please let me know what option is the best to get above information.

thanks in advance.

[James R. Ferguson]

Hi Manuales:

> I mean, i have to get a size report of different paths , my boss needs to know how much we are using in KB.

The 'du' command is designed for this. You could summarize a path like this:

# du -ks /path

...and then to find the one-level deeper directory usage:

# ls -l /path | awk '/^d/ {print $NF}'|xargs du -ks

Regards!

...JRF...

[Dennis Handly]

>I have to get a size report of different paths, my boss needs to know how much we are using in KB.

You can use "du -kx".

[Manuales]

thaks both ..
now, how can i get the result in:
bytes
kbytes
mbytes ?

thanks.

[James R. Ferguson]

Hi (again) Manuales:

> now, how can i get the result in: bytes kbytes mbytes ?

Using 'du -k' means Kilobytes, so you need to appropriately convert by factors of 1024. You have quite enough examples to deduce how to do that :-)

Regards!

...JRF...

[Manuales]

tell me please !!!!

[Manuales]

tell me please !!!! today i am very tired to think it .... pleaseeeeeeeeeeeee

[Manuales]

i deduced:
$ du -m
du: illegal option -- m
usage: du [-a|-s] [-kbrx] [-t type] [name ...]

here i found:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/pseries/v5r3/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.aix.cmds/doc/aixcmds2/du.htm

To summarize the disk usage of a directory tree and each of its subtrees in MB blocks, enter:
du -m /home/fran

but it did not work for me !!!

how can i get it?

[James R. Ferguson]

Hi:

Why would you look at AIX manpages for HP-UX options? To convert KB to MB, divide by 1024.

Using my suggestion of:

# ls -l /path|awk '/^d/ {print $NF}'|xargs du -ks

...which reports KB sizes, to show in MB, you could do:

# ls -l /path|awk '/^d/ {print $NF}'|xargs du -ks|awk '{printf "%6.2f %s\n",$1/1024,$2}'

For a simple 'du' [ which includes both files and directory sizes ]:

# du -k /path|awk '{printf "%6.2f %s\n",$1/1024,$2}'

...should you want the output sorted in desceding size order pipe to a sort like:

# du -k /path|awk '{printf "%6.2f %s\n",$1/1024,$2}'|sort -knr1,1

Regards!

...JRF...

[Manuales]

thanks a lot !!!!!
Really, it was very easy but i am a little tired, i have 2 nights without sleeping ... thanks a lot for your great support ... (i am not very familiar with this comands and concepts related to the size that ls command shows, i know it is a basic command but i need to be sure what exactly means ..) THANKS A LOT, have a nice evening.

[Steven Schweda]

"man ls"?

[...]
-l

(ell) List in long format, giving mode,
number of links, owner, group, size in
bytes, and [...]


> [...] i need to be sure [...]

Read the documentation? Is that so
difficult?

[Manuales]

OK, Steven, i will read the documentation more carefully...

one question:

i have these files:




REPORT IN KS:
$ ls -l |awk '/^d/ {print $NF}'|xargs du -ks
101637 .

REPORT IN MB:
$ ls -l |awk '/^d/ {print $NF}'|xargs du -ks|awk '{printf "%6.2f %s\n",$1/1024,$2}'
99.25 .


if i see the first one, i could think:
"101637 kb = 101.637 MB"
but if see the other instrucction i see: 99.25

so 101.637 is not equal to 99.25
what is the correct value to know in MB?

Thanks in advance.