On Sun, Apr 11, 1999 at 12:29:12AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, Adrian Bridgett wrote: > > Get:10 http://sunsite.org.uk unstable/main ltrace 0.3.7 [33.5kb] > > Get:11 http://sunsite.org.uk unstable/main magicfilter 1.2-29 [32.2kb] > > Get:12 http://sunsite.org.uk unstable/non-free xanim 2.80.1-2 [528kb] > > Get:13 http://sunsite.org.uk unstable/main xproc 1:2.0.0-2 [21.2kb] > > Get:14 http://sunsite.org.uk unstable/non-free zip 2.20-3 [68.9kb] > > > > Um - I know Debian's for hackers but do we have to count in hex :-) > > Well the short version of this long story is that those numbers are in no > way representative of the current number of download, the remaining number > of downloads or anything else. They are ment to be used as labels so you > can see which download is for which longer description. This is > particularly important for apt-get update where all the download threads > are called Packages :> > > If you -really- think it is an issue I can add a configuration directive > to change it <shrug>
Well I don't mind, but I think it would be nicer in decimal (just a printf() change I hope). It seemed in some sort of order here - if the packages are tagged sequentially then it is some indication of what package number you are up to. OTOH if it is meant as a (unique) tag, maybe getting the first two consonants maybe better? Adrian email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing. PGP key available on public key servers Avoid tiresome goat sacrifices -=- use Debian Linux http://www.debian.org
