How about just adding another decimal place to the current way, "1.50h".
I think it would be plenty of detail for something like "23.47d". It
would be accurate to about 15 minutes when it started counting days, and
would not take up much space.
On 8/10/2013 12:00 PM, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
Scott Dwyer wrote:
The programmer in me would like detail, so "1:30:00" would be my
preference. But I think that if this option is chosen, then it should
be in the format something like "0d:1h:30m:00s", so that there would
be no mistake when looking at a glance.
Thanks. Screen space is limited, and I think "0d:1h:30m:00s" is too
long to fit. I'll try to include as much detail as possible in the
space available. Maybe "0d:1h:30m".
Best regards,
Antonio.
_______________________________________________
Bug-ddrescue mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-ddrescue
_______________________________________________
Bug-ddrescue mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-ddrescue
