On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 09:00:55 -0400
Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 11:59:54 (+0200),
Martin Geisler wrote:
Would you consider changing the texts to reflect the IEC standard of
KiB for 1024 bytes, MiB for 1024 KiB, and GiB for 1024 MiB?
Boy I hope
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 15:22:14 (+0200),
Jackob McRose wrote:
Well, it IS a nonsense, but everyone already get used for 1024
multiplies, I think it is a bit too late for changing this. Only
effect will be more clueless people.
Resistance is NOT futile. You do not have to be
Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 11:59:54 (+0200),
Martin Geisler wrote:
Would you consider changing the texts to reflect the IEC standard of
KiB for 1024 bytes, MiB for 1024 KiB, and GiB for 1024 MiB?
Boy I hope not. Such nonsense has no place in
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 15:50:20 (+0200),
Martin Geisler wrote:
Well, reading through the Usage Notes section on Wikipedia is
interesting. We're dealing with bytes in all six cases, but there are
differences:
* A MB of RAM is 1024 * 1024 bytes.
Agreed.
* A MB on a harddisk is 1000
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 18:45:00 (+0200),
FORT Yannick wrote:
I really think the MiB standard MUST be used, if you don't respect
standards, you surely want people to use .doc, .xls for office use,
MSN as a chat protocol, THIS is stupid ...
Your conclusion is not supported by your
Learning something in school in France does not make it a standard.
And saying somebody MUST use something in HIS OWN program is just
inappropriate. If you want a version with MiB, you can patch the
sources :)
On 7/21/05, FORT Yannick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone; it's my first mail
Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If we allow learning curve to dictate our modus operandi, why aren't
we all using MacOS and an iMac?
:-)
I guess it comes down to personal preferrence then... I like the idea
of having prefixes with a fixed meaning: M = 10^6, Mi = 2^20, always.
I
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 19:00:11 (+0200),
Martin Geisler wrote:
I guess it comes down to personal preferrence then... I like the
idea of having prefixes with a fixed meaning: M = 10^6, Mi = 2^20,
always.
If something more reasonable comes along, I might reconsider. But
saying
Hey,
I've checked a small prog (a window, a box, a check button and a radio
button) with valgrind.
It remains 2 mem leak (for this prog ;) ) that i don't know how to fix.
Here are the reports of valgrind:
==19838== 13 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 9 of 93
==19838==
I have a proposition:
Why not make it a configurable option? That way everyone will be happy. yay!!
Long live the freedom of choise!
Daniel
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to
Thanks, patch applied to CVS.
On 7/21/05, Dylan Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Currently ecore_dlist_append has a bug in that it increments the
list-nodes without considering whether it makes a previously invalid
list-index valid. If this happens, the list has a valid index, and thus
On Wednesday, 20 July 2005, at 04:23:27 (-0600),
Tres Melton wrote:
Please ignore the parent email, I was collecting information for an
email and accidently had the control down when I hit return. Sorry.
Basically, go to http://sourceforge.net (login or not), search for
Eterm, click on the
Hi, everyone. I was just wondering what sort of environment you guys
program in so that when you edit, for example, some header file, you
don't mess up the good one already on your system. Do you copy over all
E17 stuff from /usr/include, /usr/local/include, etc. and /usr/lib,
/usr/local/lib, etc.
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 17:30 -0700, Matthew Mullins wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to come up with a better way to download
(weather html in my case) than using wget through a
system() function. Whenever system() is used, it
hangs E completely until the function returns. For
fast connections,
On Thursday, 21 July 2005, at 19:34:58 (-0600),
Eric Thompson wrote:
I think that he's saying that the link to Eterm's cvs repository (as
in the code repository) is pointing to the wrong place. It's pointing
to the cvs repository for the content of the eterm.sourceforge.net
website pages
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:52:57 -0500 (CDT)
Edward Presutti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please disregard that first patch I sent out earlier. This one is an
updated version. It has been tested against current anon-CVS as of
19:40 CST.
This patch has configuration save/load as well as the
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:33:00 +0200
gimpel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:52:57 -0500 (CDT)
Edward Presutti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please disregard that first patch I sent out earlier. This one is an
updated version. It has been tested against current anon-CVS as of
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:42:51 +0200
gimpel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh heh. BUG BUG!
It currently still shows KB in memory module where it
should be MB :)
cheers!
To answer myself
i edited the mem_swap_get() and mem_real_get()
stuff in e_mod_main.c line 488ff : MB to GB, KB to MB and B
On Thu, July 21, 2005 3:42 am, gimpel said:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:33:00 +0200
gimpel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh heh. BUG BUG!
It currently still shows KB in memory module where it
should be MB :)
cheers!
heh, oops. That's what I get for excessive copy/paste. I'm about to fly
out for
gimpel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:42:51 +0200
gimpel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh heh. BUG BUG!
It currently still shows KB in memory module where it
should be MB :)
cheers!
To answer myself
i edited the mem_swap_get() and mem_real_get()
stuff in
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 04:27:51 -0600
Tres Melton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 11:07 +0200, gimpel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:42:51 +0200
gimpel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh heh. BUG BUG!
It currently still shows KB in memory module where it
should be MB :)
21 matches
Mail list logo
