applications should respect standardized units

Bug #119822 reported by Shirish Agarwal
6
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Ubuntu
Invalid
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

Would it be a good idea to have standardized binary prefixes (IEC standard)
everywhere or atleast make the move to. Just using the above example :-

aptitude show filezilla
Package: filezilla
State: not installed
Version: 3.0.0~beta10-0ubuntu1
Priority: optional
Section: universe/net
Maintainer: Ubuntu MOTU Developers <email address hidden>
Uncompressed Size: 2134k
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.5-5), libgcc1 (>= 1:4.2-20070516), libgnutls13 (>=
        1.5.3-0), libidn11 (>= 0.5.18), libstdc++6 (>= 4.2-20070516),
        libwxbase2.8-0 (>= 2.8.4.0), libwxgtk2.8-0 (>= 2.8.4.0),
        filezilla-common (= 3.0.0~beta10-0ubuntu1)
Recommends: filezilla-locales
Description: Port of the famous Win32 graphical FTP client
 FileZilla is a fast and reliable FTP client for windows with lots of useful
 features and an intuitive interface.

 It's now multi-platform.

 FileZilla includes the following features :
 * Easy to use
 * Multilingual (English, German, French, Japanese, just to name a few)
 * Strong encryption support using SFTP over SSH and FTP over SSL/TLS
 * Supports transfer resuming and files larger than 4 GiB
 * Site Manager
 * Queue support
 * Proxy support
 * Speed limits
 * MODE Z transfer compressing
 * ... and more!

 Homepage: http://filezilla-project.org/

 Now as can be seen it says 2134K but confused as in 2134 kilobytes
(1000) or 2134 Kibibytes (1024) , I know it might mean a change to
large no. of softwares but it would be nicer in the long run as we
would have accurate sizes (reported or seen) by user.

Revision history for this message
Áron Sisak (asisak) wrote :

Thanks for your suggestion. However, the changes you are requesting aren't really a bug and require more discussion, which should be done on an appropriate mailing list or forum. <http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists> might be a good start.

I also unmarked aptitude as this seems to be an issue that affects package descriptions in general rather than aptitude.

Revision history for this message
Jan Claeys (janc) wrote :

The best way to fix this is through the upstream authors. In my experience, many of them are afraid that this change will result in a lot of (support) questions from people who don't know what it means, but my experience says that most people just don't care, and only a handful will ask about it out of curiosity. Also, some computer magazines like the Dutch "PC Active" have a permanent insert about binary SI prefixes in their Q&A section.

Other upstreams will complain about things having been their way for as long as they remember, and those people might be more difficult to convince...

description: updated
description: updated
Revision history for this message
Endolith (endolith) wrote :

Should this be a Blueprint instead? I'm still sketchy on the difference between wishlist and Blueprint.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers