On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, David Wagle wrote: > You can stat a directory, you do not need to have awk sum things up for > you. If that is true, then I'll agree with your assessment, but I haven't been able to figure that out. How can it be done? I don't see any documentation. You suggested this command... stat --format=%s ...but when I run it on a directory... stat --format=%s dir ...it does not look at contents and just gives me the file size I get from the ls -ld command: $ stat --format=%s miller 4096 $ ls -ld miller drwxrwxr-x. 3 millerm1 guanwh 4096 Mar 28 12:27 miller That directory contains many gigabytes of files (see below), so 4096 is not the answer we're looking for. Mike > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Mike Miller <mbmiller+l at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, David Wagle wrote: >> >> why it violates the unix philosophy - in my mind - is that apparent size >>> has nothing to do with he primary function of du - which is to display disk >>> usage. And the unix philosophy is to do one thing and do it well. >>> >>> the apparent size flag for du is trying to get du to do things that other >>> utilities already do. >>> >> >> >> Do you mean like find + xargs + awk working in combination... >> >> >> $ find miller -print0 | xargs -0 stat --format=%s | awk >> '{sum+=$1}END{print sum}' >> 145159848954 >> >> ...(adding a for loop to deal with a list of directories), or do you mean >> that some utility actually does this? >> >> What was wrong with my argument about the space that would be used on a >> tape if the files were to be written to tape via tar command? >> >> What was wrong with my argument about the size of the files on a >> compressed disk? >> >> >> Mike >> _______________________________________________ >> TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota >> tclug-list at mn-linux.org >> http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list >> >