On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:40:34AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> [Michael Hanke]
> > I wonder whether it is possible to get information about which
> > package is installed/used on a particular architecture.
>
> It is possible, but it isn't done at the moment. We do not store the
> data
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 10:15:40PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
>> >> [Michael Hanke]
>> >> > To me it looks like stats for
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 04:10:39PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > I must note the coolness of how many more 'secondary' architecture
> > installations we are attaining with etch.
>
> Wouldn't that just be because with Etch we again offer to install popcon
> during new installations? We did not do th
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 10:15:40PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >> [Michael Hanke]
> >> > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
> >> > including
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
>> [Michael Hanke]
>> > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
>> > including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree?
>
>> I'm not sure if that
On Sunday 06 May 2007 05:07:48 Michael Hanke wrote:
> But sometimes upstream does not agree.
>
> Nevertheless, when they say, 'we provide binaries for Linux', they always
> mean i386 Linux with everything linked statically to a huge binary blob.
>
> I'd really like to be able to provide some hard n
On Sunday 06 May 2007 15:55, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I must note the coolness of how many more 'secondary' architecture
> installations we are attaining with etch.
Wouldn't that just be because with Etch we again offer to install popcon
during new installations? We did not do that with Sarge...
pg
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:40:34AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 11:14:32AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > [...]
> >44 0.13% hppa
> >52 0.15% alpha
> >53 0.15% mipsel
> > 171 0.49% sparc
> > 448 1.27% powerpc
> > 615 1.75% arm
> > [
On Sun, 6 May 2007 13:07:48 +0200
Michael Hanke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So far, I only know the general fraction of non-i386 users. But this
> fraction is most likely very different for particular fields (e.g.
> office suite on ARM machines or embedded sutff on AMD64).
(Which is then skewed
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 11:23:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> > [Michael Hanke]
> > > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
> > > including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree?
>
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 11:23:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> > [Michael Hanke]
> > > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
> > > including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree?
>
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 11:23:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> > [Michael Hanke]
> > > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
> > > including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree?
>
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Michael Hanke]
> > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
> > including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree?
> I'm not sure if that would be the correct cutoff point, or if only
> amd6
[Michael Hanke]
> To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and
> including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree?
I'm not sure if that would be the correct cutoff point, or if only
amd64 and i386 have enough submissions to ignore the privacy issue.
I'm not quite s
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:40:34AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Michael Hanke]
> > I wonder whether it is possible to get information about which
> > package is installed/used on a particular architecture.
>
> It is possible, but it isn't done at the moment. We do not store the
> data nee
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 10:40 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Michael Hanke]
> > I wonder whether it is possible to get information about which
> > package is installed/used on a particular architecture.
>
> It is possible, but it isn't done at the moment. We do not store the
> data needed to
[Michael Hanke]
> I wonder whether it is possible to get information about which
> package is installed/used on a particular architecture.
It is possible, but it isn't done at the moment. We do not store the
data needed to generate such reports, but it could be done with the
data set we have at
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 11:14:32AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> This is the current architecture distribution.
>
> 2 0.01% i486
> 2 0.01% kfreebsd-amd64
> 3 0.01% hurd-i386
> 3 0.01% ppc64
> 7 0.02% armel
> 9 0.03% armeb
> 9 0.03% s390
> 9
18 matches
Mail list logo
