'Twas brillig, and Christian Lohmaier at 26/06/12 16:51 did gyre and gimble: > Hi Colin, *, > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Colin Guthrie <[email protected]> wrote: >> 'Twas brillig, and Christian Lohmaier at 26/06/12 15:26 did gyre and gimble: >> >> What about if they transfer a file from OSX to Linux? OSX uses base 10: > > can not confirm, see > http://frupic.frubar.net/25973
Well I literally just confirmed it on the OSX box next to me, so take it as you like. It said, literally: "10.5MB on disk". This was both in finder itself in the little file preview and in the "Get Info" dialog which also showed the size in bytes in brackets. I'm not an expert but the above screen shot looks like a very old version of OSX. >> Personally I don't give a flying fig what's shown :) > > I take that as you're not opposing a patch to change nautilus' > file-size-display. I'm saying I don't really care what's shown. If given the choice between maintaining patched downstream behaviour vs. unpatched upstream behaviour I'd take the latter seeing as it is cleaner and I don't personally care which is shown. So based purely on the principle of keeping downstream patching as light as possible, I'd be against such a change. I should point out that this is an opinion that is not based on the functionality of the change itself, just general principles, so I was deliberately trying not to voice a particular opinion on the functionality itself :) I don't think I ever use any summarised value for knowing anything more than the rough size of a file - if I need to know it's size properly, I use bytes - anything that displays things with an M or G suffix is an approximation to me and I don't really care if that approximation is somewhat ambiguous due to the base used). Col -- Colin Guthrie colin(at)mageia.org http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/ Open Source: Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/ PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/ Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/
