Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 04/14/05 17:08 CST: > These values really overspecify the point and the high precision is a > bit misleading. I am presenting a suggestion for discussion: > > SBUs less then 0.1 should be specified as: > > Estimated build time: < 0.1 SBU
To me, the *lack* of precision in this example is much more misleading that what we have now. Let's say for the sake of roundness, binutils takes 2.5 minutes (two and one-half). Now 0.1 SBU would be 15 seconds. This would be way wrong for a package that compiles and installs in one, or two seconds. To the point it would look like we didn't know how to do elementary calculations. > SBUs between 9.9 and 0.1 (inclusive) should be rounded to one decimal: > > Estimated build time: 6.7 SBU > > SBUs greater than 10 should be rounded to whole numbers: > > Estimated build time: 12 SBU This would work, though I don't see the harm in a decimal in all the SBU figures. Just my thoughts. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 17:18:00 up 12 days, 16:51, 3 users, load average: 0.11, 0.08, 0.02 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
