cross-posted from: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/13814482

I just noticed that eza can now display total disk space used by directories!

I think this is pretty cool. I wanted it for a long time.

There are other ways to get the information of course. But having it integrated with all the other options for listing directories is fab. eza has features like --git-awareness, --tree display, clickable --hyperlink, filetype --icons and other display, permissions, dates, ownerships, and other stuff. being able to mash everything together in any arbitrary way which is useful is handy. And of course you can --sort=size

docs:

  --total-size               show the size of a directory as the size of all
                             files and directories inside (unix only)

It also (optionally) color codes the information. Values measures in kb, mb, and gb are clear. Here is a screenshot to show that:

eza --long -h --total-size --sort=oldest --no-permissions --no-user

Of course it take a little while to load large directories so you will not want to use by default.

Looks like it was first implemented Oct 2023 with some fixes since then. (Changelog). PR #533 - feat: added recursive directory parser with `–total-size` flag by Xemptuous

  • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nzM
    71·
    7 months ago

    No, @[email protected] is correct.

    I just did a test using dd - I created 100 files of exactly 1 MiB each (1048576 bytes). du reported the size as “100M” as expected, whereas eza reported it as “105M” - which is what you’d get if you divided 104857600 by 1000000 (= 104.8576 or 105M if you round it off).

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      6·
      7 months ago

      He is wrong, as I explained it multiple times that this is not the issue here. Install eza and compare to du and possibly some other application that reports the directory size. The difference in filesize cannot be explained by 1000 vs 1024 base. Do the math if you don’t believe me.

      eza is reporting false directory size for me, unless there is an explanation.

      [Desktop]$ du --human-readable --apparent-size --all --max-depth 1 ./trampoline
518     ./trampoline/src
148M    ./trampoline/target
1,1M    ./trampoline/doc
8       ./trampoline/.gitignore
26K     ./trampoline/.git
330     ./trampoline/Cargo.toml
2,1K    ./trampoline/Cargo.lock
149M    ./trampoline
[Desktop]$ du --human-readable --apparent-size --all --max-depth 1 --si ./trampoline
518     ./trampoline/src
155M    ./trampoline/target
1,2M    ./trampoline/doc
8       ./trampoline/.gitignore
27k     ./trampoline/.git
330     ./trampoline/Cargo.toml
2,2k    ./trampoline/Cargo.lock
157M    ./trampoline
[Desktop]$ eza -l --total-size --no-permissions --no-user ./trampoline
2,1k 25 Feb 21:36 Cargo.lock
330  4 Mär 09:21 Cargo.toml
1,1M  5 Apr 12:34 doc
518  5 Apr 12:49 src
183M  4 Apr 20:26 target

      And for reference Dolphin the filemanager of KDE Plasma reports 149,1 MiB (156.366.443) , which aligns with du without using --si option. Even the one folder “target” is at 183M with eza (which is the biggest folder in that directory anyway).

      • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nzM
        9·
        7 months ago

        I was talking about the 1000 vs 1024 issue, do the dd test yourself and it’s easy to verify that he was right.

        As for the specific descrepancy that you’re seeing, lots of things can throw off a file size calculation - symlinks, sparse files, reflinks, compression etc. Since you’re the only one with access to your files, you’ll need to investigate and come to a conclusion yourself (and file a bug report if necessary).