From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 16:17:43 -0500
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <d4aaeac9019d72d94f2bb7c6af6ab1a1@chula.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120115161831.GA624@polynum.com>
References: <20120114080106.GA807@polynum.com>
	<CAOw7k5iApz8mkb1kaBQe+4rG-TTC1oOLu1kYJQDmrFCx7QCC_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120115161831.GA624@polynum.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] du vs. ls: duplication or not?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5cbc8dd8-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Since ls(1) gives the size of the file; since du(1) can not really or at
> least not always in an arbitrary context tells the "real" occupation of
> disk size, is not ls(1) enough?

plan 9 ls does not have a -R option.

- erik