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

  • lseif
    132·
    8 months ago

    this looks like one is using the SI 1000-based units, instead of the binary 1024-based. im pretty sure du has a --si option.

    the B (for bytes) is omitted, so it each is ambiguous to whether its MiB (mebibytes – binary) or MB (megabytes – SI).

    i may be wrong on the technicals but u get the jist.

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      8·
      8 months ago

      No, the difference is way too high to explain it like this, there is no way that 1024 vs 1000 base could explain an increase of approx. “35M” for a “149M” directory. Other folders are much closer like “20K” and “20K” or =or “44M” vs “45M”. Also as said Dolphin filemanager reports the same output as du. I even tested du with --si option, which power of 1000 instead 1024 (I’m pretty sure eza does it correctly with 1024, so this is not necessary option to compare anyway).

      • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nzM
        71·
        8 months ago

        No, @lseif@sopuli.xyz 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·
          8 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·
            8 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).