>> (dammit!!).  To this end, I modified dump so that it prints a time
>> stamp for each completion estimate.  I included the seconds in the
>> timestamp but they look to be unnecessary.  The time printed is the
>> time of the time stamp, another option would be to print the time of
>> completion, something along the lines of:
>> 
>>   DUMP: 3.07% done, finished in 2:37 (22:18)
>> 
>> Where the numbers in brackets are the estimated finishing time.  I am
>> not fussed either way, printing the time of the estimate or the
>> estimated end time - either would be handy to have.... thoughts?
>
>Yes please!  ;-)
>
>I prefer the estimated finishing time (with the duration as shown
>above) rather than the time of the ETA calculation -- it's simpler and
>more obvious....

yeah, the estimated finishing time is much more useful.  if you add
the time the message is printed, it quickly becomes obvious that you
get an update once every five minutes and then repeated time stamps
are almost redundant.  on the other hand, something to do the math for
me (ie, add estimated completion time to the current time) seems much
more useful.

most people care when it will be done, not when they were last lied
to.  :)

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."