On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:06:22PM +0200, Erling Westenvik wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:27:36AM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > you will then end up with some of them switching to dreadful MiB etc. ;) > > Kinda off topic and I take it you were being sarcastic, but your > mentioning of the "dreadful MiB" reminded me about the LibreOffice > spreadsheet I'm using to calculate from GiB/GB to sectors so that I can > have disklabel(8) partition my harddisks according to standard units. > > Are there strong opinions against following standards and start > converting to the proper terms for gigabytes (decimal, base 10, 1GB = > 1000^3 bytes) and gibibytes (binary, base 2, 1 GiB = 1024^3 bytes)?
There are violent and possibly homicidal opinions against such a move. Mine being one. gibi is gibberish. .... Ken > > After all it's been a while since it was logical (!) to infer that since > 1024^1 (kibi) is *almost* 1000^1 (kilo), then 1024^3 (gibi) must > *almost* be 1000^3 (giga).. ;) > > Personally I would love to see disklabel(8) default to display sizes in > base-10 and with something like an optional -i or -2 switch to display > information in the old (current) base 2 definition. At least it would be > nice if it were using proper units - like GiB instead of GB. > > Cheers, > > Erling
