#3827 has broken the ETA format when downloading/installing components

[rami3l]

@djc Just tried the latest build and this looks incorrect.

Originally posted by @rami3l in #3827 (comment)

This regression has been discovered in the following version:

> rustup --version
rustup 1.27.1 :: 1.27.0+133 (eca50133c 2024-05-15)
info: This is the version for the rustup toolchain manager, not the rustc compiler.
info: The currently active `rustc` version is `rustc 1.78.0 (9b00956e5 2024-04-29)`

[rami3l]

Suggestion: we should stick to the old format:

rustup/src/cli/download_tracker.rs

Lines 188 to 196 in 9caf4fc

	format!(
	"{} / {} ({:3.0} %) {} in {} ETA: {}",
	total_h,
	content_len_h,
	percent,
	speed_h,
	elapsed_h.display(),
	eta_h.display(),
	)

... which means there should be an ETA: {} somewhere.

My suggestion write!(f, " ETA: {}", self.0.display()), in #3827 (comment) should do exactly this.

[djc]

Why should we stick to the old format? I agree with #3826 that showing it after finishing is pointless.

[rami3l]

Why should we stick to the old format? I agree with #3826 that showing it after finishing is pointless.

@djc Sorry, I meant stick to the old format when downloading. The expected result should be something like in 1s ETA: Unknown.

[rami3l]

For example if ETA is 3s, the current version will print in 1s3s, which is clearly not ideal.

[djc]

Ahh, no, I only applied half of your suggestion -- sorry, was too hasty; fix in #3829.

I was confused for a while by your screenshot showing "Unknown", but that seems unrelated.

[rami3l]

Ahh, no, I only applied half of your suggestion -- sorry, was too hasty; fix in #3829.

I was confused for a while by your screenshot showing "Unknown", but that seems unrelated.

@djc Sorry, that Unknown is caused by a division-by-zero I believe. I probably won't be able to make a better screenshot: it all goes too fast on my machine :]

[djc]

All of this code looks pretty shitty and would like to use indicatif instead (#1835), but that'll have to wait for another day.

[rami3l]

All of this code looks pretty shitty and would like to use indicatif instead (#1835), but that'll have to wait for another day.

@djc I'm also in favor of using the console suite (incl. dialoguer and indicatif). In #3803 however I tried my best not to introduce new dependencies 😅

[djc]

Yeah, one step at a time. async -> tracing -> indicatif.