On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Mike Bird <<a href="mailto:mgb-ubuntu@yosemite.net">mgb-ubuntu@yosemite.net</a>> wrote: <div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">On Sat June 28 2008 10:15:34 Robert Dailey wrote: > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Corey Bettenhausen > <<a href="mailto:corey@31415926535.com">corey@31415926535.com</a>> > > wrote: > > Robert Dailey wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Karl Larsen <<a href="mailto:k5di@zianet.com">k5di@zianet.com</a>> wrote: > > >> Robert Dailey wrote: > > >>> Hi, > > >>> > > >>> I'm currently using Ubuntu Server 8. Is there a way to use the 'ls' > > >> > > >> command > > >> > > >>> to display the size of a directory? That is, the size should be the > > > > added > > > > >>> size of the contents of files and other subdirectories (recursive). > > >> > > >> I use $du -h which tells you how many gigabytes you have. > > > > > > That's almost what I'm looking for, except I don't want it to be > > > > recursive. > > So, which is it? Recursive or not? Either way, "man du". Take note of > > the "--max-depth" option. I usually like the "-c" option as well. > > -Corey > > When I mentioned "recursive" in my original post, I was referring to the > math- The math that calculates the size of the folder should be recursive, > in that it will search the directory tree for all files under the folder in > question and add their sizes together to form the final directory size. The > display routine itself should *NOT* be recursive, as I only care to see the > size of a specific folder and NOT its contents. </div></div>When you carefully read "man du" before posting this question you must have accidently overlooked the "-s" switch.</blockquote></div> I posted this question because I didn't know about 'du'... -s switch did the trick.