[blivet:master 1/2] Further abstract loopbackedtestcase on block_size.

Vratislav Podzimek vpodzime at redhat.com
Wed Oct 1 14:05:38 UTC 2014


On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 09:46 -0400, Anne Mulhern wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vratislav Podzimek" <vpodzime at redhat.com>
> > To: "anaconda patch review" <anaconda-patches at lists.fedorahosted.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 5:47:46 AM
> > Subject: Re: [blivet:master 1/2] Further abstract loopbackedtestcase on	block_size.
> > 
> > On Tue, 2014-09-30 at 09:02 -0400, mulhern wrote:
> 
> <-- SNIP -->
> 
> > > @@ -67,33 +69,38 @@ def getFreeLoopDev():
> > >  @unittest.skipUnless(os.geteuid() == 0, "requires root privileges")
> > >  class LoopBackedTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
> > >  
> > > -    DEFAULT_STORE_SIZE = 102400
> > > +    DEFAULT_BLOCK_SIZE = Size(1024)
> > I think 'Size("1 KiB")' would be nicer here.
> > 
> 
> I think so, too.
> 
> Can we think about humanReadable() one last time? By default, it displays "1 KiB" as "1024 B".
> I would prefer "1 KiB" and I think most people would.
> 
> Trickier is:
> 
> Which is better "1044 B" or "1.02 KiB"?
> 
> What about "9.99 KiB" vs. "10229 B"?
I like the old rule that less than 10 of something means that users will
probably care about small differences, more than 10 means less than 0.01
is not that important difference. With B and KiB it gets a bit weird,
but we hardly ever show such values. And if we really encounter
something that is smaller than 10 KiB I think it is okay to show the
number of bytes.

-- 
Vratislav Podzimek

Anaconda Rider | Red Hat, Inc. | Brno - Czech Republic



More information about the anaconda-patches mailing list