[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#270969: [patch] Improved progress bar information

Some comments on the patch from #debian-boot pasted below.
I will update the patch and submit a new version.

[16:14:00]  fjp hopes joeyh didn't miss my patch for base-installer because of 
his list problems ;-)
[16:17:59] <joeyh> fjp: at first glance, doesn't this increase the amount of 
space given on the progress bar to kernel installation?
[16:18:42] <joeyh> and extra installation
[16:18:59] <fjp> joeyh: Yes it does, but my timings during a netboot 
installation give these proportions.
[16:19:12] <joeyh> netboot is not very usual though
[16:19:19] <joeyh> that'd be because the kernel is big..
[16:19:37] <fjp> Yes, most is download time.
[16:20:17] <fjp> I'll also do timings for a netinst CD installation. Just 
ignore that part of the patch for now if you like.
[16:20:31] <joeyh> I like the rest of it, except for the WRK_POS=$((POS + step 
* 15 / 100)) bit
[16:20:45] <joeyh> that blew my mind, since it's using a variable from the 
very EOF
[16:20:48] <Kamion> that should be $POS I think, POS there is a bashism
[16:20:54] <fjp> Why? It works fine in ash.
[16:21:10] <Kamion> well, non-POSIXism at least
[16:21:23] <fjp> In that case, also $step.
[16:21:28] <Kamion> right
[16:22:11] <joeyh> fjp: I'd suggest a little wrapper subroutine for that, 
since you do it several times
[16:22:23] <joeyh> and make step and POS proper glbals
[16:22:39] <joeyh> (probably with renaming)
[16:23:28] <fjp> OK. Will do and submit new patch. What do you think of 
template suggestions?
[16:24:21] <joeyh> I don't much like the (this may take a long time) bit, 
otherwise fine
[16:24:37] <fjp> OK. I'll drop that tamplate.
[16:24:37] <joeyh> although I think we use a word other than "getting" 
[16:24:55] <fjp> I'll check.
[16:25:10] <joeyh> probably retrieving

Reply to: