> Josip Rodin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 6 May 2007 15:45:
> >Actually, it wouldn't be all that difficult. All we have to do is ask.
>
> Ours is available if you're interested.
>
> >My point being,
> >just because it's on project-owned machines that doesn't necessarily
> mean
> >that we'll do
Josip Rodin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 6 May 2007 15:45:
>Actually, it wouldn't be all that difficult. All we have to do is ask.
Ours is available if you're interested.
>My point being,
>just because it's on project-owned machines that doesn't necessarily mean
>that we'll do a particularly
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:21:09AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> > Looking at the submission numbers from
> > http://popcon.debian.org/>, I am happy to report that the number
> > of Etch installations is increasing fast.
>
> IMHO there are some ways we could track get some better
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
[Johannes Wiedersich]
> My point was, that popcon is not a good metric for the number of
> installed systems, since it reports about the same number of systems
> that we agree on being way too low.
I agree. It can be used as a lower bound, thought. It is unlikely
that there are fewer Debian sys
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:53:51 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Anyway, popularity-contest give us feedback on the package usage, and
> even if the number of contributors do not match the number of installed
> systems, it still give us valuable feedback on the relative package
> usage. :)
BTW, is
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Presently the number of installations reported to popcon is about the
>> same as the number of subscriptions to debian-security-announce, but I
>> am sure there are many users of debian who don't read d-s-a and many
>> users, who have severa
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> Presently the number of installations reported to popcon is about the
> same as the number of subscriptions to debian-security-announce, but I
> am sure there are many users of debian who don't read d-s-a and many
> users, who have several -maybe hundreds- of installati
* Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:45:38 -0400):
>
> Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > However, changing the popcon debconf question to something like the
> > following might be an acceptable compromise:
>
> Farid not, it might result in slightly more installations being
> reported, but
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:53:42 +0200
Johannes Wiedersich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For laptops brand/model would be nice, although it probably will be
> difficult or impossible to include that in an automated fashion.
No it wouldn't. Most laptops have usable information in their smbios
which. S
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:16:33AM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
>
> Yes, and some (like me) use a private mirror for internal use. But at
> least we could estimate a lower count, which would be better, than the
> "don't know" we currently have.
>
That makes sense.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Rob
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:21:09AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
> wrote:
>> The only caveat I can think of (but there might be others) is that it would
>> not be possible to properly count installations that are using
>> corporate (or ISP's) caching proxies (in
Hi!
* Roberto C. Sánchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070413 00:27]:
> > The only caveat I can think of (but there might be others) is that it would
> > not be possible to properly count installations that are using
> > corporate (or ISP's) caching proxies (in somecases those are transparent to
> > the en
* Ron Johnson:
> On 04/12/07 15:14, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Ron Johnson:
>>
>>> On 04/12/07 14:32, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>>> [snip]
You can also see this by looking at /proc/cpuinfo looking for "lm" in
flags.
>>> Does lahf_lm count?
>>
>> The file should also list "lm" earlier on the s
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 08:35:50PM +0200, Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 17:32 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:22:37 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >
> > > > dmidecode output is a big problem. It includes machine UUID and serial
> >
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Better yet, set up a MRTG-like graph. Everybody loves fancy graphs and they
> are really useful in presentations at conferences :)
http://popcon.debian.org/stat/sub-i386.png
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:21:09AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
>
> The only caveat I can think of (but there might be others) is that it would
> not be possible to properly count installations that are using
> corporate (or ISP's) caching proxies (in somecases those are transparen
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 07:25:02PM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> Please keep on sending these interesting stats, perhaps once-per-week,
> to some blog or some mailing list. I'll be real glad. Thanks...
Better yet, set up a MRTG-like graph. Everybody loves fancy graphs and they
are really us
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 05:29:13AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > Looking at the submission numbers from
> > http://popcon.debian.org/>, I am happy to report that the number
> > of Etch installations is increasing fast. Here are the number of
> > submissions collected by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/12/07 15:14, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ron Johnson:
>
>> On 04/12/07 14:32, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> You can also see this by looking at /proc/cpuinfo looking for "lm" in
>>> flags.
>> Does lahf_lm count?
>
> The file should also list "
* Ron Johnson:
> On 04/12/07 14:32, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> You can also see this by looking at /proc/cpuinfo looking for "lm" in
>> flags.
>
> Does lahf_lm count?
The file should also list "lm" earlier on the same line.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/12/07 14:32, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
[snip]
>
> You can also see this by looking at /proc/cpuinfo looking for "lm" in
> flags.
Does lahf_lm count?
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fis
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 09:32:33PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > I would be very interested in an i386-only feature to report wether the CPU
> > is 64-bit capable (I have code in win32-loader with this functionality).
> >
> > I'm not sure how this would fit in your client/server protocol, but
[Robert Millan]
> I would be very interested in an i386-only feature to report wether
> the CPU is 64-bit capable (I have code in win32-loader with this
> functionality).
>
> I'm not sure how this would fit in your client/server protocol, but I can
> easily grab the code from win32-loader and inte
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> However, changing the popcon debconf question to something like the
> following might be an acceptable compromise:
Farid not, it might result in slightly more installations being
reported, but it will not let us calculate the approximate total number
of new installations, s
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 09:24:38PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 01:49:19PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >
> > Actually, I've considered adding hardware reporting to popcon, using a
> > separate question (or more options, not sure which), and hardware
> > reports do
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 01:49:19PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> Actually, I've considered adding hardware reporting to popcon, using a
> separate question (or more options, not sure which), and hardware
> reports do not need to be sent as often as package usage. Such
> report-once settin
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 17:32 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:22:37 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> > > dmidecode output is a big problem. It includes machine UUID and serial
> > > numbers.
> > Yes.
> > Perhaps we only want to collect a subset of that information, or at
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 10:39 +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> However, changing the popcon debconf question to something like the
> following might be an acceptable compromise:
>
> Would you like to participate in the Debian package popularity
> contest meter? Blah blah blah. You may
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 11:31 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
> * 2007-04-12 11:29, Joey Hess wrote:
> > I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
> > depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
> > results.
>
> Isn't this a violation of user's priva
On 4/12/07, Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Looking at the submission numbers from
http://popcon.debian.org/>, I am happy to report that the number
of Etch installations is increasing fast. Here are the number of
submissions collected by popularity-contest, with the increment. I
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:22:37 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > dmidecode output is a big problem. It includes machine UUID and serial
> > numbers.
> Yes.
> Perhaps we only want to collect a subset of that information, or at
> least warn the admin about the issues.
I'd suggest to show the per
[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]
> dmidecode output is a big problem. It includes machine UUID and serial
> numbers.
Yes.
Perhaps we only want to collect a subset of that information, or at
least warn the admin about the issues.
I believe The ubuntu hardware database collect that kind of
informati
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> However, changing the popcon debconf question to something like the
> following might be an acceptable compromise:
>
> Would you like to participate in the Debian package popularity
> contest meter? Blah blah blah. You may also choose to only
> repor
Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Sebastian Mach]
>> Is that only for stable? Me for example uses a february testing, and
>> I might not be alone
>
> These numbers are for everyone, including oldstable, stable, testing
> and unstable.
And what is most interesting about them i
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Actually, I've considered adding hardware reporting to popcon, using a
> separate question (or more options, not sure which), and hardware
> reports do not need to be sent as often as package usage. Such
> report-once setting should report the outp
[Lars Wirzenius]
> However, changing the popcon debconf question to something like the
> following might be an acceptable compromise:
>
> Would you like to participate in the Debian package popularity
> contest meter? Blah blah blah. You may also choose to only
> report onc
[Sebastian Mach]
> Is that only for stable? Me for example uses a february testing, and
> I might not be alone
These numbers are for everyone, including oldstable, stable, testing
and unstable.
Friendly,
--
Petter Reinholdtsen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I may be wrong, I don't know, but in my opinion a ping to call back home
even if the user said `No' is a evil behaviour and Debian should avoid it.
I agree. If the user says "no", we should do nothing.
Indeed, I also think that "No" here means "I don't want to send any k
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 01:13:55PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 05:29 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
> > depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
> > results.
>
> Since there are som
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:39:32 +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > I may be wrong, I don't know, but in my opinion a ping to call back home
> > even if the user said `No' is a evil behaviour and Debian should avoid it.
> I agree. If the user says "no", we should do nothing.
Full ack.
> [ ] N
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 05:29 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
> depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
> results.
Since there are some potential drawbacks to this functionality, what
concrete gain would the pro
On to, 2007-04-12 at 12:16 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
> * 2007-04-12 12:09, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > As long as we don't use that to collect sensitive information, it would be
> > ok IMO. (Of course, a preseed question could avoid it completely too)
>
> I think Google Earth for Linux does
Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * 2007-04-12 11:29, Joey Hess wrote:
>> I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
>> depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
>> results.
>
> Isn't this a violation of user's privacy? If the user h
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
> > * 2007-04-12 11:29, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
> > > depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count
> the
> > > results.
> >
> > Isn't
* 2007-04-12 12:09, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> As long as we don't use that to collect sensitive information, it would be
> ok IMO. (Of course, a preseed question could avoid it completely too)
I think Google Earth for Linux does the same, and IIRC the general
agreement in the free software communit
Hi,
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
> * 2007-04-12 11:29, Joey Hess wrote:
> > I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
> > depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
> > results.
>
> Isn't this a violation of user's privacy? If th
* 2007-04-12 11:29, Joey Hess wrote:
> I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
> depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
> results.
Isn't this a violation of user's privacy? If the user hitted `No', this
really means that he doesn't want to ca
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Looking at the submission numbers from
> http://popcon.debian.org/>, I am happy to report that the number
> of Etch installations is increasing fast. Here are the number of
> submissions collected by popularity-contest, with the increment. It
> is easy to see when Etc
Petter Reinholdtsen schrieb:
Looking at the submission numbers from
http://popcon.debian.org/>, I am happy to report that the number
of Etch installations is increasing fast. Here are the number of
submissions collected by popularity-contest, with the increment. It
is easy to see when Etch was
Looking at the submission numbers from
http://popcon.debian.org/>, I am happy to report that the number
of Etch installations is increasing fast. Here are the number of
submissions collected by popularity-contest, with the increment. It
is easy to see when Etch was released.
date submiss
51 matches
Mail list logo
