From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E16D888C9 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 08:57:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C329224F85 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 08:56:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 08:56:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E532D4279F for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 08:56:30 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 08:56:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20230621140035.381027-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> <8c5c2ce7-98ad-de35-9685-3facc5248987@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Sterz In-Reply-To: <8c5c2ce7-98ad-de35-9685-3facc5248987@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.050 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.093 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH installer] tui: multiply the disk size back into bytes X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 06:57:02 -0000 On 21.06.23 16:36, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 21/06/2023 um 16:00 schrieb Stefan Sterz: >> previously the installer correctly divided the value when using them >> for the `FloatEditView`, but forgot to multiply the value again when >> retrieving it after editing. this commit fixes that >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Sterz >> --- >> tested this only locally and didn't build the installer completelly. >> i am not sure if the installer handles this value correctly once it >> is forwarded to the perl installer. if the perl installer expects >> bytes here, it should work just fine, though. > > no it doesn't it expects Gigabyte in floats, see: > https://git.proxmox.com/?p=pve-installer.git;a=commitdiff;h=9a2d64977f73cec225c407ff13765ef02e2ff9e9 > alright, thanks for that, i am not too familiar with this code base ^^'. should we then model these sizes as `f64` instead? i'd go ahead and prepare a patch with that, but it's a bit more churn so i want to make sure that's the way to go.