Steve Langasek [2012-06-04 12:37 -0700]: > Anyway, I bring this up because the hallway discussion at the latest UDS > seemed to converge on 750MiB (== 786MB) for the image size for 12.10
Ah, ok; sorry, then I misremembered. > The question is, over the long term does it make more sense to have images > sized in MiB or MB? Is a 1GB USB stick really 1GB, or is it 1GiB? I checked the 4 USB Sticks that I have, as a random sample. Their sizes are: 63.0 MiB == 66.1 MB 981 MiB == 1028.6 MB 7.5 GiB == 8.0 GB 29.9 GiB == 32.1 GB So except for the really really old 64 MB one, the others are in GB, not GiB. > I'm personally fine with either 800MB or 750MiB (786MB) as a target for this > cycle, I just want to make sure we understand our trajectory for future > releases and that the limit in quantal makes sense as a point on that > trajectory. Right, same here. It seems the main confusion is that everyone seems to think the decision is someone else's. :-) Martin -- Martin Pitt http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com Debian Developer http://www.debian.org -- Ubuntu-release mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
