Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||ls has improper documentation|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Brian "netdragon" Bober <netdragon>|
|Component:||coreutils||Assignee:||Tim Waugh <twaugh>|
|Status:||CLOSED WONTFIX||QA Contact:|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2005-04-18 08:45:31 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
Description Brian "netdragon" Bober 2005-04-01 12:16:40 EST
Description of problem: When you type ls -- help, it shows the following: " -s, --size print size of each file, in blocks" Instead it should show: " -s, --size print disk space used by file on file system, in blocks" "ls -s" doesn't show the actual size of the file, but the number of blocks taken up on disk. Therefore, it's expected if a block is 4K and the file is 1K, then it will return 4K (if you use the -h option). The issue is that if you use the --block-size parameter, it shows (disk space used)/(block size specified), not (file size)/(block size specified), which is what we'd assume based on the description. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 5.2.1-31 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: ls --help shows "print size of each file, in blocks" for -s Expected results: ls --help shows "print disk space used by file on file system, in blocks" Additional info: Since this is an issue for all distributions, it should be changed upstream. This bug was reported by someone else on the Debian bug site http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=116358 and the argument given by the Debian developer was not valid because he said he wouldn't change the description of --block-size in the help listing, but that description isn't the problem... The issue is that the description for -s needs to be changed.
Comment 1 Tim Waugh 2005-04-18 08:45:31 EDT
The word "size" here is slightly ambiguous, but the fact that the units are "blocks" is a big clue about what the quantity being shown really represents. FWIW, the info page is absolutely clear. Not worth patching IMHO. Take it up with the upstream authors if you wish.