Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Rodrigo Bermejo
> <rodrigo.bermejo / ps.ge.com> wrote:
>> If you just need to list the name of the files, du is faster than ls
>>  du -a  should make it.
>>
>>  -r.
> 
> First of all, that's using the wrong tool for the job. The job of ls
> is to list files, du is for estimating file space usage. Second of
> all, on my system at least, you're wrong about speed:
> 
> $ time ls -1>/dev/null
> real    0m0.013s
> user    0m0.004s
> sys     0m0.008s
> $ time du -a>/dev/null
> real    0m0.080s
> user    0m0.004s
> sys     0m0.020s
> 
> the -1 on ls is to prevent formatting of the results
> 
> Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney

Sorry I did not see all your files were on the same directory. . I 
should meant "du is 'better' for recursive listing (friendly parsing 
format)" . Not sure but I got the idea du was faster for recursive 
listing.

D:\Users>time du -a
The system cannot accept the time entered.
Enter the new time:


Jeje ...you got the idea.


-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.