Monday, 20200127 18:29-0500, Daniel Jakots wrote: > Can't you achieve what you want with `du -sh * | sort -h`? du(1)'s > -h options will automatically select the best suffix and sort(1)'s > -h will sort first using the suffix then the numerical value.
Thanks! I didn't know about "sort -h". That indeed does what I want, and is a bit more readable (e.g. 8G instead of the quick mental math in evaluating 8192M). Like Todd said, old habits die hard. And at least in my case, I'm pleasantly surprised any time a tool features smart extensions and I don't have to manipulate arrays of raw integers. :) Actually, I think you've convinced me that using "sort -h" is better. In particular, I like that it future-proofs us up to and including yottabytes. What about something like this, to highlight this common use case? --- Index: du.1 =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/du/du.1,v retrieving revision 1.35 diff -u -p -r1.35 du.1 --- du.1 2 Sep 2019 21:18:41 -0000 1.35 +++ du.1 29 Jan 2020 16:02:45 -0000 @@ -147,6 +147,16 @@ option is specified. .El .Sh EXIT STATUS .Ex -std du +.Sh EXAMPLES +To sort human-readable output by size, one might use the human-readable +extension to +.Xr sort 1 , +for example: +.Pp +.Dl du -sh * | sort -h +.Pp +This is useful to quickly identify large files and folders consuming +disk space. .Sh SEE ALSO .Xr df 1 , .Xr fts_open 3 ,
