Hi Andy :)
* Andy Furniss <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> dixit:
> DervishD wrote:
> > Yes, I already knew that, what I was asking is why SI units are not
> >used and "shortcuts" are used instead: see my original message, I was
> >not sure if kilobit was being used correctly (meaning 1000 bits) or if
> >it was being used mistakenly for kibibit (1024 bits), and on top of
> >that, why "b" was being used as byte when the SI prefix for byte is "B".
>
> It got changed so kbit means 1000 when S.Hemminger took over maintenance
> IIRC.
Ok, thanks :))
> > I mean, tc doesn't seem to follow any standard except maybe in
> >kilobit (which should be then used as kb, not kbit).
>
> I think changing kb and kbit would break too many existing scripts.
That's the problem with scripts that insist blindly on parsing
command output, specially with commands whose output may (and should)
change regularly when improvements are made. I supposed this was the
reason. Does "tc" have another interface, preferably in "sys" or "proc"
or the only way of getting the information is asking the kernel directly
(through "tc", for example).
Thanks a lot for your answer :)
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen!
We are waiting for 13 Feb 2009 23:31:30 +0000 ...
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
