Your message dated Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:17:26 -0800
with message-id <20141215211725.gt31...@rzlab.ucr.edu>
and subject line Re: Bug#770789: Draft of option for #770789
has caused the Debian Bug report #770789,
regarding [tech-ctte] df sizes output format
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
770789: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770789
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: tech-ctte
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: 761...@bugs.debian.org
As reported in #761424, the "sizes" output by df(1) are not actual sizes, due to the
"units" used. The "units" used are merely unit prefixes. Moreover, df uses the same
pseudo-units with different meanings. The output can therefore be misleading if one attempts to interpret it.
2 different calls seem to give different measurements for the same filesystems:
chealer@debian:~$ LANG=C df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use%
Mounted on
rootfs 1.8T 317G 1.4T 19% /
udev 10M 0 10M 0% /dev
tmpfs 252M 5.4M 247M 3%
/run
/dev/disk/by-uuid/a00f8767-e954-4b81-8035-c6bb414671cb 1.8T 317G 1.4T 19% /
tmpfs 5.0M 4.0K 5.0M 1%
/run/lock
tmpfs 961M 0 961M 0%
/run/shm
/dev/sdb2 2.2G 122M 2.0G 6%
/tmp
chealer@debian:~$ LANG=C df -H
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use%
Mounted on
rootfs 2.0T 340G 1.6T 19% /
udev 11M 0 11M 0% /dev
tmpfs 264M 5.7M 259M 3%
/run
/dev/disk/by-uuid/a00f8767-e954-4b81-8035-c6bb414671cb 2.0T 340G 1.6T 19% /
tmpfs 5.3M 4.1k 5.3M 1%
/run/lock
tmpfs 1.1G 0 1.1G 0%
/run/shm
/dev/sdb2 2.4G 128M 2.2G 6%
/tmp
chealer@debian:~$
In the first example call, JEDEC prefixes are used, while SI prefixes are used
in the second.
Michael Stone denies, excusing the behavior with space scarcity, documentation,
and what he considers as little impact:
I'm not going to deviate from upstream. [...] The
space is more important (in my opinion) than the need for a constant
reminder of the unit. The documentation is there for people to read the
first time, after that it's just not that important. (Even for the
numbers above the difference isn't really significant--the relative
sizes are the consistent, and what are the odds that you need exactly 12
gigasomethings? If you did need exactly that much space, you're probably
better off looking at kbytes or bytes anyway.)
The space scarcity and impact arguments do not hold, and unfortunately, even
the documentation does not define the pseudo-sizes currently output.
--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
user tech-c...@packages.debian.org
usertag 770789 published
On Sat, 13 Dec 2014, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I will announce the decision on -announce shortly.
Announced; closing this bug.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
You could say to the Universe this is not /fair/. And the Universe
would say: Oh it isn't? Sorry.
-- Terry Pratchett _Soul Music_ p357
--- End Message ---
