Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!codas!killer!wnp
From: wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Can't ls -l add file sizes properly??
Message-ID: <2192@killer.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Nov-87 10:46:47 EST
Article-I.D.: killer.2192
Posted: Mon Nov 23 10:46:47 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Nov-87 02:06:40 EST
References: <456@morgoth.UUCP>
Reply-To: wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul)
Organization: The Unix(tm) Connection BBS, Dallas, Tx
Lines: 23

In article <456@morgoth.UUCP> glidden@morgoth.UUCP (Ken A. Glidden) writes:
># ls -l
>total 40
>-rwxr--r--  1 glidden      2117 Aug  6 12:17 acctrpt
> ... lines deleted ...
>                         ======
>SUBTOTAL------>          35,725
>
>****
>Why does the ls -l "total" give me 40Kb and my manual addition of the file 
>sizes give me 35.7Kb !?!?!?! ...

Because the ls command total gives the total diskspace occupied by the files,
and thus always gives a multiple of 1 block - usually 512 bytes or 1 KB.
The file sizes displayed for each entry however is the actual length of the
file, disreagarding unused partial disk blocks.

Each file, even if it contains only  1 character, occupies at least one
disk block, therefore ls would display a total of 1 block but a filesize of
1 character.

Wolf Paul
ihnp4!killer!dcs!wnp