Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > I find "du" more accurate, although more tome consuming,
Yes, that's why I went ot df. so have to to > mark some instants to avoid it from interfering in the timings. > > On example is that df will include the log size, perhaps you think it is > relevant. For me the log is at /usr/src/<pkg> so it is not included. > But all numbers we give are approximate, large error bar, so I do not > dispute methods or numbers. True. > The problem there is that Ken found values very different, even one > negative: building the API docs takes less than installing the ones in > the tarball, is one example, and I can hardly believe this is possible: > build taking less time than just installing the documents. That would take some analysis. I don't see how that could happen either. > As I introduced many of these numbers, probably after what Ken used to > do with ImageMagick, what I think is that being non-english speaking > native, I am giving wrong names to what I measure. That was the reason I > detailed how and what I measure there. It seems I need to rename in the > book, some number I gave. > > What I mean is: everybody know 1 inch is different from 1 cm. But I can > use a ruler, make a measurement and tell Ken it is 1, using a cm ruler, > but he thinking I am using inches. > > He is not wrong > > I am not wrong Yes, but seconds is the same for everyone. So is <prefix>bytes. Well some differentiate between KiB and KB. :) > We are giving numbers for different things, probably my fault of not > writing carefully what my number means. WE are just giving the user an approximation. When I update, I do change the stats, but it's rarely a significant change. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
