On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 05:56:34AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > 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. Ok, I think that's a sufficient tie breaker and we should go with 800MB. I've updated the blueprint whiteboard to confirm this. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- Ubuntu-release mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
