Archaic wrote these words on 06/08/05 23:29 CST:
> These questions are for both books. (And yes, I know some answers will
> differ between books, but it would be nice to have a concise answer to
> them sitting in one place on each of the respective ml's. Perhaps the
> answers will make their way to the edguides, too. :)
I believe most of the questions you ask are answered in the BLFS
Editor's Guide, but I'll give them a shot from memory, or kind of
what I do anyway. These answers are for BLFS only.
> 1a) What are we rounding to on single file sizes (like size of tarballs
> and patches)?
Patches typically aren't identified with a size. The Editor's
Guide says to use ls -lh on package tarballs. I have been known
to use output from ls -l also, though I probably shouldn't be,
if the size using ls -l is what the maintainer says it is.
> 1b) How should we determine a single file's size? The lfs edguide gives
> an example of ls -l and assumes the output will be in bytes, but
> aliases and/or env vars could screw with that. Also, the lfs edguide
> says to divide the number by 1024, ls -lk will do that for us if we
> are indeed rounding to kB, otherwise ls -l --block-size=1 divided by
> wherever we are rounding to will work.
I'm not sure I see any difference in 1a and 1b.
> 2a) What are we rounding to on installed size?
Ed Guide says 3 significant digits, unless the file is less than
10 MB. I have been erroneously using only 1 or 2 on occasion, as
I really didn't know the rule, and I saw no significance in saying
it is 17.2 MB instead of just 17. So that makes the rule as such:
9.2 MB
17.3 MB
129 MB
> 2b) How are we getting installed size? Bruce, I noticed you do
> df -k $LFS | grep $LFS | sed -e "s/ \{2,\}/ /g" | cut -d' ' -f3, but
> df -k /x |grep /x | awk ' { print $3 }' is less expensive. Either
> way, df -k seems to be the most consistant and easiest to maintain.
I use du -scxk before and after the build.
> 3a) Where are we rounding SBU's to?
One decimal digit.
> 3b) Does the *official* SBU account for tarball extraction all the way
> to removing the sources (with exception for the occasion where the
> sources aren't removed). If so, does LFS's expect page account for
> the removal of the tcl source dir since that is where it happens?
My understanding is it is from configure to 'make install'. Extracting
tarballs doesn't count, nor do we add any of the extraneous installation
or configuration tasks (which usually are negligible).
> 3c) Does the *official* SBU account for testsuites? Or should those be
> timed and listed separately in the explanatory text that mentions
> the testsuite? What about if the book doesn't "recommend" running a
> testsuite (which I think is generally insane, BTW)?
I don't count the test suites in the SBU factor. I do however
usually parenthesize another SBU number for the test suite if it
is over 0.5 SBU
Hope this helps.
--
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]
23:40:00 up 67 days, 23:13, 2 users, load average: 0.08, 0.07, 0.01
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
