Changing KB, MB, and GB to KiB, MiB, and GiB in Configure.help
Greetings all,
I see that in the very latest Configure.help version, 2.76, available at http:/www.tuxedo.org/~esr/cml2/
Eric has decided to follow the following standard:
IEC 60027-2, Second edition, 2000-11, Letter symbols to be used in electrical technology - Part 2: Telecommunications and electronics. and has changed all the abbreviations for Kilobyte (KB) to KiB, Megabyte (MB) to MiB, etc, etc.
Now, granted that this is the "standard", should there be some discussion related to this change, or is everyone comfortable with this? It certainly made me do a double take.
Here is a snippet from the diff between versions 2.75 and 2.76 of Configure.help:
@@ -344,8 +344,8 @@
If you are compiling a kernel which will never run on a machine with more than 960 megabytes of total physical RAM, answer "off" here (default choice and suitable for most users). This will result in a
- "3GB/1GB" split: 3GB are mapped so that each process sees a 3GB - virtual memory space and the remaining part of the 4GB virtual memory + "3GiB/1GiB" split: 3GiB are mapped so that each process sees a 3GiB + virtual memory space and the remaining part of the 4GiB virtual memory
space is used by the kernel to permanently map as much physical memory as possible.
Steven
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Nayyer Tiger wrote:
| I see that in the very latest Configure.help version, 2.76, available at | http:/www.tuxedo.org/~esr/cml2/ | Eric has decided to follow the following standard: | IEC 60027-2, Second edition, 2000-11, Letter symbols to be used in | electrical technology - Part 2: Telecommunications and electronics. | and has changed all the abbreviations for Kilobyte (KB) to KiB, Megabyte | (MB) to MiB, etc, etc. | | Now, granted that this is the "standard", should there be some discussion | related to this | change, or is everyone comfortable with this? It certainly made me do a | double take.
Either decision will be disliked. I don't care for the new/standard abbreviations, but I can get used to them, and I expect that most people can.
Let's get over it and back to the good stuff.
~Randy
and who are all these anon. people you copied?!?
| Here is a snippet from the diff between versions 2.75 and 2.76 of | Configure.help: | | @@ -344,8 +344,8 @@ | If you are compiling a kernel which will never run on a machine with | more than 960 megabytes of total physical RAM, answer "off" here | (default choice and suitable for most users). This will result in a | - "3GB/1GB" split: 3GB are mapped so that each process sees a 3GB | - virtual memory space and the remaining part of the 4GB virtual memory | + "3GiB/1GiB" split: 3GiB are mapped so that each process sees a 3GiB | + virtual memory space and the remaining part of the 4GiB virtual memory | space is used by the kernel to permanently map as much physical memory | as possible.
Quoted 15 lines · Randy.Dunlap
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Nayyer Tiger wrote:
| I see that in the very latest Configure.help version, 2.76, available at | http:/www.tuxedo.org/~esr/cml2/ | Eric has decided to follow the following standard: | IEC 60027-2, Second edition, 2000-11, Letter symbols to be used in | electrical technology - Part 2: Telecommunications and electronics. | and has changed all the abbreviations for Kilobyte (KB) to KiB, Megabyte | (MB) to MiB, etc, etc. | | Now, granted that this is the "standard", should there be some discussion | related to this | change, or is everyone comfortable with this? It certainly made me do a | double take.
Quoted 8 lines
Either decision will be disliked. I don't care for the new/standard abbreviations, but I can get used to them, and I expect that most people can.
Let's get over it and back to the good stuff.
~Randy
Is it a standard or is it something in-process? The reason I ask is that neither KB nor KiB can possibly be correct.
According to the standards, where capitalization is used:
(1) For a proper name.
(2) To differentiate between otherwise identical symbols.
"KB" would mean:
Kirchoff-Bell
It needs to be:
"kb" to mean kilobyte.
In any event, I suggest that whatever exists just be left alone. Both the present and the proposed changes are incorrect. The present incorrect symbols are widely used, therefore the intent is known. The proposed symbols are not widely used and will just aggravate a sore created by Tech-Writers who can't read or write.
We have seen, in recent years, a continual change in English Language usage where, what was once considered absolutely wrong, is now considered correct. For instance double-negatives like "irregardless" are now even codified by insertion into the dictionary. FYI, it is either "regardless" or "irrespective". It can't be "irregardless".
So, let's let sleeping dogs lie. Oh yes, contractions are now getting clobbered too. It is now acceptable to spell "dont" without the apostrophe! I think Alan had something to do with that.... ;)
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.18 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Windows-2000/Professional isn't.
Quoted 19 lines · Richard B. Johnson
Quoted 18 lines · Randy.Dunlap
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Nayyer Tiger wrote:
| I see that in the very latest Configure.help version, 2.76, available | at http:/www.tuxedo.org/~esr/cml2/ | Eric has decided to follow the following standard: | IEC 60027-2, Second edition, 2000-11, Letter symbols to be used in | electrical technology - Part 2: Telecommunications and electronics. | and has changed all the abbreviations for Kilobyte (KB) to KiB, | Megabyte (MB) to MiB, etc, etc. | | Now, granted that this is the "standard", should there be some | discussion related to this | change, or is everyone comfortable with this? It certainly made me do | a double take.Either decision will be disliked. I don't care for the new/standard abbreviations, but I can get used to them, and I expect that most people can.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Let's get over it and back to the good stuff.
~Randy
Is it a standard or is it something in-process? The reason I ask is that neither KB nor KiB can possibly be correct.
KiB is correct, please visit:
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
There was a huge thread on this subject in dec '01. If anyone feels like bringing back this horse please at least read through that thread before we starting over again.
-- Jakob
Quoted 11 lines · Richard B. Johnson
According to the standards, where capitalization is used:
(1) For a proper name.
(2) To differentiate between otherwise identical symbols."KB" would mean:
Kirchoff-Bell
It needs to be:
"kb" to mean kilobyte.
Argh. Not this thread again. "kb" is kilo _bits_ not kilo _bytes_.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
Followup to: <[email protected]> By author: "Richard B. Johnson" <[email protected]> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
Quoted 8 lines
Is it a standard or is it something in-process? The reason I ask is that neither KB nor KiB can possibly be correct.
According to the standards, where capitalization is used:
(1) For a proper name.
(2) To differentiate between otherwise identical symbols.
This is obviously untrue for prefixes. Consider the prefix T (10^12), which has no lower-case equivalent.
The unit here is B, which does conflict with the unit bel, but is widely used to mean byte in computer contexts.
I don't like the pronunciations used in the new standard, but I think using Ki, Mi, Gi, ... at least in writing is a good thing, to disambiguate between binary and decimal powers. I just read them as "binary kilobytes" etc if I need to be clear.
-hpa
Signature · 3 lines
<[email protected]> at work, <[email protected]> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <[email protected]>
Quoted 2 lines · H. Peter Anvin
The unit here is B, which does conflict with the unit bel, but is widely used to mean byte in computer contexts.
Also, the kilobell is highly unlikely to be used ;)
Rik
Signature · 3 lines
<insert bitkeeper endorsement here> http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
Quoted 6 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 2 lines
The unit here is B, which does conflict with the unit bel, but is widely used to mean byte in computer contexts.
Also, the kilobell is highly unlikely to be used ;)
Rik
Dunno about that, the S/N ratio on slashdot seems to get into the kB's somedays.
=)
mike
Quoted 11 lines · Mike Dresser
Quoted 6 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 2 lines
The unit here is B, which does conflict with the unit bel, but is widely used to mean byte in computer contexts.
Also, the kilobell is highly unlikely to be used ;)
Rik
Dunno about that, the S/N ratio on slashdot seems to get into the kB's somedays.
I'm not sure what parallel universe you live in, but I'm pretty damn sure that mine doesn't have 10000 times more signal than noise on slashdot ;)
An S+N/N of one kB is 40 dB...
regards,
Rik
Signature · 3 lines
<insert bitkeeper endorsement here> http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
Quoted 11 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 2 lines · Mike Dresser
Dunno about that, the S/N ratio on slashdot seems to get into the kB's somedays.
I'm not sure what parallel universe you live in, but I'm pretty damn sure that mine doesn't have 10000 times more signal than noise on slashdot ;)
An S+N/N of one kB is 40 dB...
<pedantic>
dB is decibel, kB would be kilobel, so one kB is 10000 dB
a kilobel works out to a signal to noise ratio of 10^1000, which is pretty big, and definately a bit bigger than the slashdot signal to noise ratio :)
</pedantic>
Signature · 4 lines
Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: [email protected]
Quoted 9 lines
<pedantic>
dB is decibel, kB would be kilobel, so one kB is 10000 dB
a kilobel works out to a signal to noise ratio of 10^1000, which is pretty big, and definately a bit bigger than the slashdot signal to noise ratio :)
</pedantic>
<b><pedantic>
if dB is 10 bel's, wouldn't kB be 1000 bel's, therefore one kB is only 100 deci-bel's?
Creating a S/N ratio of 10^100?
</pedantic></b>
I forget what we were debating now.
mike
Quoted 7 lines · Mike Dresser
<b><pedantic>
if dB is 10 bel's, wouldn't kB be 1000 bel's, therefore one kB is only 100 deci-bel's?Creating a S/N ratio of 10^100?
</pedantic></b>
No Mike, go back to school!
Deci, not deca!
<dummy>Mike</dummy>
Quoted 17 lines · Mike Dresser
Quoted 11 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
The unit here is B, which does conflict with the unit bel, but is widely used to mean byte in computer contexts.
Also, the kilobell is highly unlikely to be used ;)
Rik
Dunno about that, the S/N ratio on slashdot seems to get into the kB's somedays.
I'm not sure what parallel universe you live in, but I'm pretty damn sure that mine doesn't have 10000 times more signal than noise on slashdot ;)
Quoted 6 lines
An S+N/N of one kB is 40 dB...
regards,
Rik
changing the d to a k doesn't do anything for the behaviour Bell scale, it's just scaling... :) so 1 kB = 10000 dB...
Signature · 10 lines
Met vriendelijke groeten, Remco Post SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam http://www.sara.nl High Performance Computing Tel. +31 20 592 8008 Fax. +31 20 668 3167 "I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the computer industry didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas Adams
Re: Changing KB, MB, and GB to KiB, MiB, and GiB inConfigure.help
In reply to Rik van RielQuoted 8 lines · Pete Cervasio
Quoted 3 lines · Mike Dresser
Dunno about that, the S/N ratio on slashdot seems to get into the kB's somedays.
Your threshold is set too high. Read at -1 for megabels. ;)
I think you really mean microbels..... :)
Signature · 4 lines
Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: [email protected]
Quoted 29 lines · Nayyer Tiger
Greetings all,
I see that in the very latest Configure.help version, 2.76, available at http:/www.tuxedo.org/~esr/cml2/
Eric has decided to follow the following standard:
IEC 60027-2, Second edition, 2000-11, Letter symbols to be used in electrical technology - Part 2: Telecommunications and electronics. and has changed all the abbreviations for Kilobyte (KB) to KiB, Megabyte (MB) to MiB, etc, etc.Now, granted that this is the "standard", should there be some discussion related to this
change, or is everyone comfortable with this? It certainly made me do a double take.Here is a snippet from the diff between versions 2.75 and 2.76 of Configure.help:
(quoted diff) +2
-2@@ -344,8 +344,8 @@ If you are compiling a kernel which will never run on a machine with more than 960 megabytes of total physical RAM, answer "off" here (default choice and suitable for most users). This will result in a - "3GB/1GB" split: 3GB are mapped so that each process sees a 3GB - virtual memory space and the remaining part of the 4GB virtual memory + "3GiB/1GiB" split: 3GiB are mapped so that each process sees a 3GiB + virtual memory space and the remaining part of the 4GiB virtual memory space is used by the kernel to permanently map as much physical memory as possible.
Quoted 1 line
Steven
Hey team,
This is the message I posted just before Christmas last year. The following thread was quite long and many good arguments were posted pro and con. ESR decided to keep the KiB and MiB in Configure.help after all was said and done, but then Linus split up an older version (v2.69 IIRC) which did not have these changes, performing a "pocket veto" of the MB to MiB conversion. Marcello did not accept any changes from ESR after v2.69 also, so that whole discussion was made rather moot.
So rather than beating up on this horse which was already buried last year, I suggest spending time more productively.
Steven