But what if you want to list only the directories, not files and links? Linux Handbook Abhishek Prakash. Send login link. Check your inbox and click the link.
Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again. Want to set up a homelab? Here's how I used old hardware and open source software to build my homelab. Updating WebApps is a regular task for sysadmins. Upgrading the containers that hold them is another extra effort.
Having a homelab setup has multiple advantages. Learn what it is and why you should consider a homelab for yourself. Welcome back! Add sort -nr to sort by the count instead of the directory name.
I'd like to point out that this works in OSX, too. Just copy-pasting Linux advice into an OSX shell usually doesn't work. Better way is using find command. Show 2 more comments. Assuming you have GNU find, let it find the directories and let bash do the rest: find. Its just a slighly different version from the above, so: hint: its sorted by name and its in csv for x in find. Great one! Putting it into a single line so it's confortable for direct usage in shell : find.
I needed to get the number of all files recursively count in each subdirectory. This modification gives you that: find. Kory The following will do it: find. Show 6 more comments. CervEd 1, 10 10 silver badges 16 16 bronze badges. This is so much better than the accepted answer, as you get a summary of the top-level directories!
This should be the accepted answer. Simple and comprehensible. The best answer that should be accepted is this one. Simple, elegant, and perfect for my needs.
And can be extended to count over subdirectories by replacing the field specifiers with a list of field specifiers. Add a comment. You could arrange to find all the files, remove the file names, leaving you a line containing just the directory name for each file, and then count the number of times each directory appears: find.
If you're interested in the count of the files in each sub-directory of the current directory, counting any files in any sub-directories along with the files in the immediate sub-directory, then I'd adapt the sed command to print only the top-level directory: find. Jonathan Leffler Jonathan Leffler k gold badges silver badges bronze badges.
This doesn't output directory names which don't contain any files. Not sure if this is required. True, it doesn't. Very useful answer if you just want to see the subdirectories of the current directory. Just stopped by to say thank you.
Your post saved me potentially many hours of tinkering with sed, find and who knows what else — Corvin. Here's one way to do it, but probably not the most efficient. Austin Phillips Austin Phillips It seems very expensive to run 3 commands bash , ls , wc for each directory found by find. JonathanLeffler Agreed, hence the first line of my answer. Your solution is better. From man bash , A -- signals the end of options and disables further option processing.
In this case it would prevent a misnamed file found as part of the find from becoming part of the argument processing for bash. Slightly modified version of Sebastian's answer using find instead of du to exclude file-size-related overhead that du has to perform and that is never used : find.
If you remove it, you'll see a bunch of lines like the following: dir1 dir2 1 file1 1 file2 1 file Yoory N. Everyone else's solution has one drawback or another. You can see that it has 9 files including one hidden file and 2 sub-directories in that directory. You can simply run the combination of the ls and wc command and it will display the number of files:. There is a problem with this command. It counts all the files and directories in the current directories. This is the reason why the above command showed me a count of 10 files instead of 11 9 files and 2 directories.
You probably already know that -a option of ls command shows the hidden files. But if you use the ls -a command, it also displays the. This is why you need to use -A option that displays the hidden files excluding. This will give you the correct count of files and directories in the current directory. Have a look at the output that shows a count of 11 9 files and 2 directories :.
Note that it the option used is 1 one not l L. Using 1 one lists one content per line excluding the additional line. This gives a more accurate result. What you have see so far is the count of files and directories in the current directory only. If you want to count the number of files and directories in all the subdirectories, you can use the tree command. This command shows the directory structure and then displays the summary at the bottom of the output. As you can see in the output, it shows that there are 7 directories and 20 files in total.
So far, all the solutions we have seen for counting the number of files, also take directories into account.
0コメント