On Jan 21 2025, Chris Ely wrote:
> I'm still of the opinion that introducing base 10 output, in the realm of
> files that are always stored in base 2 sized blocks, is a mistake that only
> confuses people using dd unnecessarily.
But the size of files is only rarely a multiple of the block size, s
Thank you for the links to the older bugs.
I'm still of the opinion that introducing base 10 output, in the realm of
files that are always stored in base 2 sized blocks, is a mistake that only
confuses people using dd unnecessarily.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 12:37 Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2025-01-21
On 2025-01-21 07:59, Chris Ely wrote:
I'd
much rather not see the base 10 numbers at all
No matter which of the two numbers we display, people preferring the
other number will complain. This topic has come up before, multiple
times, with people commenting at legth. See:
https://bugs.gnu
dd is a file oriented program. Files aren't stored with base 10.
For dd, especially, the default block size is 512 bytes, not 500 bytes. The
most valuable comparison isn't to some network graph you may have showing
base 10 speeds, it's to the written file.
I suppose you could display both speeds,
On 18/01/2025 14:17, Chris Ely wrote:
Hello,
human options would be better if it included base 1024 by default, the code
can turn that bit off where it doesn't want it (the si transfer status
value, should be the only place).
I'm not sure about that.
Generally data transfer rates (network, usb
Hello,
human options would be better if it included base 1024 by default, the code
can turn that bit off where it doesn't want it (the si transfer status
value, should be the only place).
I think the minimal changes would be something like this:
https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/compare/mas
