On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 13:25:47 -0600, Harshwardhan Nagaonkar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Justin Findlay wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 11:18:33AM -0600, Harshwardhan Nagaonkar wrote:
> >
> >>Andrew Jorgensen wrote:
> >>
> >>>I'd like to find the total file size of a directory (with
> >>>sub-directories).  I can use 'du -s' except that I've been told that
> >>>'du' reports disk usage, which is not the same as file size.  'ls -l'
> >>>will tell me the actual size of a single file, but won't tell me the
> >>>sum of the sizes of files in a directory.
> >>>
> >>>Am I going to have to write a script to do this seemingly simple task?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>
> >>I've been doing this task using "du -h --max-depth=1" on my home
> >>directory to find out the sizes of each directory.
> >
> >
> > I always use 'du -h *' because it's shorter. (-:
> > 
> <snip/>
> 
> Except that 'du -h *' will print out all the directories _as well as_
> all the subdirectories and their subdirectories and their subdirectories
>   and so on.
> 
> '--max-depth=1' will just limit to the current directory's children
> files/directories, not their sub directories. This way I guess you don't
> recurse everywhere! =)

'du -sh *' takes care of that also.

-- 
Andrew Jorgensen

____________________
BYU Unix Users Group 
http://uug.byu.edu/ 
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list

Reply via email to