@whitequark
-
@whitequark Fucking hell.
-
@munin so like, i have 601 files being downloaded (almost finished at the moment) in this directory, each of which is 5120 MiB in size
> 5120 MiB * 601 -> MiB
3077120 mebibyte (information)
> 5120 MiB * 601 -> MB
approx. 3226594.1 megabyte (information)only one of these numbers makes sense in light of the reported total.
-
the SI people are right and everybody doing it otherwise is wrong; you should never use the "K", "M", etc unit prefixes to mean factor of 1024. sure, with small enough sizes you can usually ignore it. but scale it up and you quickly run into trouble
@whitequark KiB, Kib, etc, are all right there if you need them
-
@munin so like, i have 601 files being downloaded (almost finished at the moment) in this directory, each of which is 5120 MiB in size
> 5120 MiB * 601 -> MiB
3077120 mebibyte (information)
> 5120 MiB * 601 -> MB
approx. 3226594.1 megabyte (information)only one of these numbers makes sense in light of the reported total.
@munin nope, the total now exceeds both numbers. what is going on
-
@whitequark this is horrible. Can someone more motivated than me confirm this from ls’s source code?
-
@whitequark this is horrible. Can someone more motivated than me confirm this from ls’s source code?
@jlargentaye i think it's doing something else entirely that inflates the total and i don't know what that is
-
the SI people are right and everybody doing it otherwise is wrong; you should never use the "K", "M", etc unit prefixes to mean factor of 1024. sure, with small enough sizes you can usually ignore it. but scale it up and you quickly run into trouble
@whitequark feels like if one is to consider themselves a computer "scientist" this basic detail about correct units is not optional
-
@whitequark feels like if one is to consider themselves a computer "scientist" this basic detail about correct units is not optional
@kkremitzki you would hope so but
-
@munin nope, the total now exceeds both numbers. what is going on
sentences I'd never expected to say: what version of ls do you have? I'm curious to see if it's replicable on any of the systems I have
-
sentences I'd never expected to say: what version of ls do you have? I'm curious to see if it's replicable on any of the systems I have
@munin gnu coreutils
-
@munin gnu coreutils
@munin try using xfs and just doing dd if=/dev/zero of=file0000 bs=1M count=5120 to replicate what i'm having
-
@kkremitzki you would hope so but
No, incorrect. Hail Eris and pass the misused units.
-
the SI people are right and everybody doing it otherwise is wrong; you should never use the "K", "M", etc unit prefixes to mean factor of 1024. sure, with small enough sizes you can usually ignore it. but scale it up and you quickly run into trouble
@whitequark K means Kelvin and MB means megabel
-
the SI people are right and everybody doing it otherwise is wrong; you should never use the "K", "M", etc unit prefixes to mean factor of 1024. sure, with small enough sizes you can usually ignore it. but scale it up and you quickly run into trouble
@whitequark Sadly, my favourite example of this sort of confusion is too antiquated for most people now.
Is a 1.44M floppy disk using MB or MiB?
-
D drajt@fosstodon.org shared this topic
