scp: rounding bug in displayed transfer rate?

[Brolin Empey]

2009/3/20 Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de>
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:23:33AM -0700, Brolin Empey wrote:
> > Perhaps I am too contemporary for this discussion list:  I am writing
> > this message in a proportional font in Gmail's Web interface in
> > Mozilla Firefox on Windows Vista with subpixel font antialiasing on a
> > widescreen LCD monitor. ;)
>
> You are.  We are interested in content, not in presentation.

I was joking, hence the ";)".  I am interested in content too, but I
like to use links in e-mail without having to paste long URLs.  I also
like to be able to use rich text formatting such as bold, italic, and
monospaced (as opposed to proportional) text for emphasis.  I am used
to using such formatting in e-mail and on Web forums.  I wrote the
paragraph you quoted because I thought limiting discussion list users
to plain text seems to support the stereotype that discussion lists
and Usenet are for people who are so passionate about criticising HTML
e-mail that they include such things as "ASCII ribbon against HTML
e-mail" in their signatures.  I like to use Unicode characters, such
as em dashes, arrows, copyright, registered, and trade mark symbols
instead of ASCII approximations.  That is why I joked that I was too
contemporary for this discussion list.  Artificial limitations seem
silly because I am using a GUI on a microcomputer, not a text terminal
connected to a mainframe or minicomputer.  However, I have still
respected the rules of this discussion list by using plain text.  Of
course, I know text terminals are not limited to use with mainframes
and minicomputers.  I frequently use terminal emulators, console
windows (on Windows), and text-mode or (graphics-mode) frame buffer
VTs on Linux.  I have even written Linux man pages.  I used to be
convinced by plain text supporters that e-mail should be written in
plain text, but I switched to HTML e-mail because I like the
presentational control offered by rich text.  I still believe in
separation of structure from presentation, which is why I prefer using
document markup languages, such as XHTML + CSS, in a text editor over
graphical word processors.  I have seen many users of graphical word
processors hard-wire text formatting instead of using classes or
styles.  Granted, I suppose I may be hard-wiring formatting in HTML
e-mail, but it does not bother me because no one has ever complained
nor have I been unable to read HTML e-mail from others.  I could
probably use user stylesheets if I really wanted all of my received
e-mail to be presented uniformly, but I am not sufficiently motivated
to do so.

> I'm reading this in an 80x24 xterm using "mutt", because it's WAY faster
> to use the keyboard than having klick on things all the time.

I am not clicking all the time while using a WIMP/GUI environment to
read and write e-mail;  I am not one of those users who uses the mouse
to select the next field in a form instead of pressing Tab. :P

I agree about the keyboard being faster than the mouse (or other
pointing device) for certain tasks.  For example, I use many readline
shortcuts in bash.  I also prefer to use the keyboard exclusively to
edit text with Vim.