Ken Moffat wrote these words on 03/10/08 18:28 CST: > Care to spell out your preferences ? To me, blfs has for long > been somewhat pernickety about specifying sizes and SBUs in decimals. > (I've always found some variation in my own build times, even for > repeated builds when the cache should be "hot"). I'm happy to > attempt to fit in with what I find, but a statement for "how small we > ought to measure" would be useful.
"Pernickity" ?? I had to look in the dictionary. *And you misspelled it* :-) My dictionary has "persnickity", which would be the perfect word in the context you used it. (don't you just love it when someone uses a word you haven't a clue what it means, but they misspell it?) :-) Just messing with you, Ken The Editor's Guide says one thing, and I didn't reference it, but here is what *I* do (not that it is correct or right or the way it should be or anything else): Tarball size: I don't even round it. I use 576kb if it isn't quite a megabyte. If it is over a megabyte I use the entire integer side and the first decimal of the fraction (e.g., 3,476,345 is 3.4 MB in the book). Buildsize: I round to the nearest MB. Even if under 10 megabyte. To me, 6.3 MB is the same as 6 MB. 205.6 is *always* 205. OpenOffice is its own animal. I don't even know what it is, I don't build it anymore (well I haven't in a long time, anyway). Buildtime: Rounded to the nearest one decimal fraction. No-brainer. If I recall correctly, the Editor's Guide is the same on this one. If over 10 SBU's I'd probably like to see it at an integer value, though I can't guarantee how I've done it in the past. Use your good judgment. -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.22] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 19:02:02 up 22 days, 9:50, 1 user, load average: 1.16, 0.56, 0.29 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
