On 05/17/2014 05:44 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > Pádraig Brady wrote: >> if ((count % 1000) && ! (count % 1024)) >> options |= human_base_1024 > > Unfortunately this won't work either, as it would introduce a worse > user-interface glitch: transfers of some block counts would be treated > inconsistently with transfers of others. If I've done the math right: > > $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null count=99997 > 99997+0 records in > 99997+0 records out > 51198464 bytes (51 MB) copied, 0.101863 s, 503 MB/s > $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null count=99998 > 99998+0 records in > 99998+0 records out > 51198976 bytes (49 MiB) copied, 0.0938181 s, 546 MB/s
Not sure how much of an issue that would be in practice. > > A quick glance at the output might incorrectly conclude that the first dd (51 > M) transferred more data than the second dd (49 M). > > If we're going to make a change, perhaps it would be better to make it a > separate option that ORs in human_base_1024, so that a user who prefers > powers-of-1024 can alias 'dd' to 'dd status=human-readable' or whatever. Not worth an option I think, so let's leave this for now. thanks, Pádraig.
