On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 06:56:17PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > NACK, this only addresses half of the review comments. > > Can you please explain 1207959552 is not 1GB? Do you happen to mean > 1000000000? The reason the term 'GiB' exists is because while GB might > mean 1000000000, its almost always misused to mean 1207959552. If > thats what you meant, Why do you want to use that value when you > yourself are saying that its less accurate? Also why is it so > important to use the less accurate value that these patches have to be > NACKed for it? Please check your facts before sending such inflammatory emails, thanks. 1GiB is 1073741824, and I did check that before sending the very first mail talking about 1GB. Christophe
Attachment:
pgpq4kfPeeM_1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
