On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 05:36:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes:
A peripheral point (already addressed earlier in this thread): It's
still ambiguous in that it doesn't specify in which direction the
rounding should occur.
Did we resolve what
Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org writes:
Is that any relevant ? I mean, the difference between rounding up and
rounding down is 1 KiB. Not even the size of an ext3 block. It makes
virtually no difference.
It doesn't, yes, but Ben also has a point that while we're writing a
specification, we may
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 11:14:31PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org writes:
Is that any relevant ? I mean, the difference between rounding up and
rounding down is 1 KiB. Not even the size of an ext3 block. It makes
virtually no difference.
It doesn't, yes, but
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 13:29:48 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
I formally object to the part '(in other words, the size in kibibytes)'.
(I believe this change is not informative and only serve the purpose of
endorsing a standard which does not meet consensus in Debian.)
+1.
Cheers,
Julien
On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 17:20 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 13:29:48 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
I formally object to the part '(in other words, the size in kibibytes)'.
(I believe this change is not informative and only serve the purpose of
endorsing a standard
Andrew McMillan and...@morphoss.com writes:
It seems a sufficient quantity of people object to even the merest
mention of 'kibibytes' as shorthand for 'bytes divided by 1024 and
rounded' that only the fully expanded wording will be acceptable.
The wording without it is unambiguous:
The
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes:
A peripheral point (already addressed earlier in this thread): It's
still ambiguous in that it doesn't specify in which direction the
rounding should occur.
Did we resolve what rounding behavior we should document here? It's not
in the bug log.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:42:24AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
I formally object to the part '(in other words, the size in
kibibytes)'.
(I believe this change is not informative and only serve the purpose
of endorsing a standard which does not meet consensus in Debian.)
Okay. As
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Martin Dorey mdo...@bluearc.com writes:
debian-policy appears to define Installed-Size's units as thousands of
bytes:
5.6.20 Installed-Size
This field appears in the control files of binary packages, and in
the Packages
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Agreed. At the time Policy was originally written, kilobyte nearly
universally meant kibibyte in the industry. I'll change this to:
The disk space is given as the
Russ Allbery wrote:
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:Agreed. At the
time Policy was originally written, kilobyte nearly
universally meant kibibyte in the industry. I'll change this to:The disk
space
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Okay. As previously mentioned, I disagree and would prefer to retain
it, so I think at this point we need to hear more opinions to see how
widespread the disagreement is.
I agree with you, Russ. I think it's wise to refer to the real unity
otherwise it
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:42:24AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Agreed. At the time Policy was originally written, kilobyte nearly
universally meant kibibyte in the
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:17:03PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 09:42:24AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Agreed. At the time Policy was originally
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 09:42 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Agreed. At the time Policy was originally written, kilobyte nearly
universally meant kibibyte in the industry.
Andrew McMillan and...@morphoss.com writes:
I'm happy with kibibytes, but on the other hand I'm also happy with
kilobytes if the code is changed to actually report 1,000's of bytes.
I think it's more common to deal with kibibytes for computing-related
things. Having dpkg present
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:56:58AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
I would prefer if the word kibibyte was not used in policy, so I would
strike '(in other words, the size in kibibytes)'.
I don't much like the word either, but at this
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:56:58AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
I don't much like the word either, but at this point it's an IEEE and
ISO standard (IEEE 1541-2002). My feeling is that standards are more
important than aesthetics and we should generally
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 19:13:23 -0700, Martin Dorey wrote:
debian-policy appears to define Installed-Size's units as thousands of bytes:
5.6.20 Installed-Size
This field appears in the control files of binary packages, and in the
Packages files. It gives the total amount of disk space
Ben Pfaff wrote:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes:
If you're going that far, please perform one of the following:
s/rounded/fractions rounded up/
s/rounded/fractions rounded down/
s/rounded/fractions rounded to the nearest whole
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:13:23PM -0700, Martin Dorey wrote:
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.7.2.2
Severity: minor
debian-policy appears to define Installed-Size's units as thousands of bytes:
5.6.20 Installed-Size
This field appears in the control files of binary packages, and in
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 07:49:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Martin Dorey mdo...@bluearc.com writes:
debian-policy appears to define Installed-Size's units as thousands of
bytes:
5.6.20 Installed-Size
This field appears in the control files of binary packages, and in
the Packages
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
I would prefer if the word kibibyte was not used in policy, so I would
strike '(in other words, the size in kibibytes)'.
I don't much like the word either, but at this point it's an IEEE and
ISO standard (IEEE 1541-2002). My feeling is
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
I would change:
It gives the total amount of disk space required to install the named
package.
to
It gives an indicative amount of disk space required to install the
named package.
because the field cannot give the real required disk space:
- (we really round up
Hi!
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 22:25:15 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
I would change:
It gives the total amount of disk space required to install the named
package.
to
It gives an indicative amount of disk space required to install the
named package.
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.7.2.2
Severity: minor
debian-policy appears to define Installed-Size's units as thousands of bytes:
5.6.20 Installed-Size
This field appears in the control files of binary packages, and in the
Packages files. It gives the total amount of disk space required
Martin Dorey mdo...@bluearc.com writes:
debian-policy appears to define Installed-Size's units as thousands of
bytes:
5.6.20 Installed-Size
This field appears in the control files of binary packages, and in
the Packages files. It gives the total amount of disk space required
to install the
27 matches
Mail list logo
