Jan Groenewald wrote: > Hi > > On 20 August 2016 at 19:36, Harald Schilly <harald.schi...@gmail.com > <mailto:harald.schi...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 4:40 PM, leif <not.rea...@online.de > <mailto:not.rea...@online.de>> wrote: > > Is there demand for sage-7.3-Ubuntu_{14.04,15.10,16.04}-i686.tar.bz2? > > (After all, Ubuntu stopped "recommending" their 32-bit OS versions even > > on 64-bit machines.) > > > > > So, the only thing I can offer are javascript events when you click on > a download. That doesn't say much, though. Data says: > > all for ubuntu, unique events, for the past 3 months: > > sage 7.2, 16.04, 64bit, 337 normal + 51 torrent dls > sage 7.2, 14.04, 64bit, 190 normal + 36 torrent dls > sage 7.3, 16.04, 64bit, 87 + 15 > sage 7.2, 16.04. 32bit, 76 > ... > two 7.1s with 37 and 31 dls > ... > sage 7.2, 14.04, 32bit, 20 > > this is incomplete, but it looks like the total demand is somewhere at > 10% to 15% of the downloads.
Presumably stupid question, I'm pretty ignorant w.r.t. the web stuff, but do these figures include feedback from the mirrors (modulo "pure" FTP downloads)? > and for context, the top download is the OVA. It has 3546 + 828 dls, > which is about 50% of all downloads overall. and they're followed by > the ones for OSX. Well, that's not too surprising, and I bet it mainly reflects that Windows users are even less likely to build from source than MacOS X users already are compared to *nix users. (Also, site installations, if using binary dists at all, presumably count as one in the latter.) But perhaps the Ubuntu downloads here also "suffer" from the availability of the PPA. > 0 jan@debian:~$for i in precise trusty; do for j in amd64 i386; do echo > $i $j; python bin/ppastats.py aims sagemath $i $j; done; done > precise amd64 > sagemath-upstream-binary 6.1.1ubuntu2 9648 > precise i386 > trusty amd64 > sagemath-upstream-binary 7.2~aimsppa1 7557 > sagemath-upstream-binary-full 7.2~aimsppa1 315 > trusty i386 > sagemath-upstream-binary 7.2~aimsppa1 306 > sagemath-upstream-binary-full 7.2~aimsppa1 26 > 0 jan@debian:~$ > > Note that trusty actually includes trusty vivid wily xenial since I copy > the trusty binary forward in the PPA. I think maybe that is unique IPs > so computer labs could be under represented. Oh, so after more than two years, precise still outperforms trusty and all of its successors together. Is Sage built from source on 32-bit Ubuntu > 12.04 (where Sage's GCC does *not* by default get installed and used) at all functional? (Or, will it pass [p]testlong?) In contrast to Sage's vanilla FSF GCC 4.9.3, Ubuntu's GCCs use '-fstack-protector' by default. (It's still not clear to me whether the failure is due to a real bug, and why it apparently doesn't pop up with 64-bit builds -- the latter may be due to different alignment.) -leif > https://blog.launchpad.net/cool-new-stuff/tracking-ppa-download-statistics > https://askubuntu.com/questions/296197/how-to-find-out-the-package-download-count-from-a-ppa > > Regards, > Jan > > > > > -- > .~. > /V\ Jan Groenewald > /( )\ www.aims.ac.za <http://www.aims.ac.za> > ^^-^^ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-release@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
