Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
--On Thursday, September 14, 2006 08:40:21 -0500 Doug Poland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just glanced at the latest statistics on www.bsdstats.org. In the last week or so OpenBSD has overtaken FreeBSD in the USA. Should one conclude that OpenBSD admins have enthusiastically embraced this project and FreeBSD admins have not; or, is OpenBSD really more widely deployed than FreeBSD? What page are you looking at? www.bsdstats.org shows 2868 FreeBSD machines and 1379 OpenBSD machines. Only in the US is OpenBSD ahead of FreeBSD. So I suppose you could say that OpenBSD admins *within* the US have embraced the project more willingly than FreeBSD admins or OpenBSD is more widely used *within* the US. But I doubt any of this is meaningful. It won't be until we get a great deal more systems reporting. 5097 systems worldwide must be less than 1% of the total systems in use worldwide, I would think. Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 08:40:21AM -0500, Doug Poland wrote: I just glanced at the latest statistics on www.bsdstats.org. In the last week or so OpenBSD has overtaken FreeBSD in the USA. Should one conclude that OpenBSD admins have enthusiastically embraced this project and FreeBSD admins have not; or, is OpenBSD really more widely deployed than FreeBSD? One should not conclude anything until the numbers are much larger than they are now, because small fluctuations from e.g. regional promotion of bsdstats in one country but not another, or one large company deploying it on all machine, will dramatically change your conclusions. Kris pgp3vAekpFTu7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
On Thursday 14 September 2006 12:09, Kris Kennaway wrote: One should not conclude anything until the numbers are much larger than they are now, because small fluctuations from e.g. regional promotion of bsdstats in one country but not another, or one large company deploying it on all machine, will dramatically change your conclusions. I was just wondering if there is any consensus on adding BSDStats to the base system? If would appear to be a logical step to take so as to insure that all users of FBSD would be counted. An end user could always disable the sending of data by disabling it in the /etc/rc.file. I feel that unless it is part of the base system and turned on by default, too many users will never take part in the reporting process. Also, there does not appear to be a 'man' page for BSDStats. Is that correct? Perhaps there should be one. Just my 2ยข. -- Gerard Seibert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Be cheerful while you are alive. Phathotep, 24th Century B.C. pgpTfjisGXrFu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 12:53:04PM -0400, Gerard Seibert wrote: On Thursday 14 September 2006 12:09, Kris Kennaway wrote: One should not conclude anything until the numbers are much larger than they are now, because small fluctuations from e.g. regional promotion of bsdstats in one country but not another, or one large company deploying it on all machine, will dramatically change your conclusions. I was just wondering if there is any consensus on adding BSDStats to the base system? If would appear to be a logical step to take so as to insure that all users of FBSD would be counted. An end user could always disable the sending of data by disabling it in the /etc/rc.file. I feel that unless it is part of the base system and turned on by default, too many users will never take part in the reporting process. I highly doubt that it would be enabled by default in FreeBSD, since many of our users (or their employers) would consider it a privacy breach to have their systems reporting back automatically. Kris pgphwA3uRDlUy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
What about making it a sysinstall option? Not in the base install, but the option is presented when setting up a new box. On 9/14/06, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 12:53:04PM -0400, Gerard Seibert wrote: On Thursday 14 September 2006 12:09, Kris Kennaway wrote: One should not conclude anything until the numbers are much larger than they are now, because small fluctuations from e.g. regional promotion of bsdstats in one country but not another, or one large company deploying it on all machine, will dramatically change your conclusions. I was just wondering if there is any consensus on adding BSDStats to the base system? If would appear to be a logical step to take so as to insure that all users of FBSD would be counted. An end user could always disable the sending of data by disabling it in the /etc/rc.file. I feel that unless it is part of the base system and turned on by default, too many users will never take part in the reporting process. I highly doubt that it would be enabled by default in FreeBSD, since many of our users (or their employers) would consider it a privacy breach to have their systems reporting back automatically. Kris -- I'm nerdy in the extreme and whiter than sour cream ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 01:29:38PM -0400, Andy Greenwood wrote: What about making it a sysinstall option? Not in the base install, but the option is presented when setting up a new box. That's not ruled out, if someone does the work. Kris pgpIrJBp4JQSq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: BSDStats project, interesting returns from OpenBSD
On Thursday 14 September 2006 13:29, Andy Greenwood wrote: What about making it a sysinstall option? Not in the base install, but the option is presented when setting up a new box. On 9/14/06, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 12:53:04PM -0400, Gerard Seibert wrote: On Thursday 14 September 2006 12:09, Kris Kennaway wrote: One should not conclude anything until the numbers are much larger than they are now, because small fluctuations from e.g. regional promotion of bsdstats in one country but not another, or one large company deploying it on all machine, will dramatically change your conclusions. I was just wondering if there is any consensus on adding BSDStats to the base system? If would appear to be a logical step to take so as to insure that all users of FBSD would be counted. An end user could always disable the sending of data by disabling it in the /etc/rc.file. I feel that unless it is part of the base system and turned on by default, too many users will never take part in the reporting process. I highly doubt that it would be enabled by default in FreeBSD, since many of our users (or their employers) would consider it a privacy breach to have their systems reporting back automatically. That is sort of what I meant. Have it installed as part of the base system in much the same manner as portsnap is. The required entry would be placed in the /etc/rc.conf file but commented out or set to 'NO', which ever method is felt to be better. Perhaps the initial MOTD might reference it and point to where more info regarding it might be found. Just a suggestion and please don't top post. It makes it hard to follow a thread. -- Gerard A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read test. Q: Why is top posting such a bad idea? A: Top posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? TOPIC: Posting Etiquette pgpqZymKmjNuk.pgp Description: PGP signature
