From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 17:04:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 17:04:20 -0400 Received: from saturn.cs.uml.edu ([129.63.8.2]:1555 "EHLO saturn.cs.uml.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 17:04:12 -0400 From: "Albert D. Cahalan" Message-Id: <200106072102.f57L2gm377429@saturn.cs.uml.edu> Subject: Re: temperature standard - global config option? To: lk@Aniela.EU.ORG (L. K.) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 17:02:42 -0400 (EDT) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org), unlisted-recipients:;;;@Aniela.EU.ORG; (no To-header on input) In-Reply-To: from "L. K." at Jun 07, 2001 03:20:03 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org L. K. writes: > Why not make it in Celsius ? Is more easy to read it this way. No, because then the software must handle negative numbers for cooled computers. CentiKelvin is fine. Do C=cK/100-273.15 if you really must... but you still have a number that is useless to a human. Humans need a seconds-to-destruction value or an alarm. Negative temperatures do not really exist.