2010/10/27 Kaiting Chen kaitocr...@gmail.com:
This is called mirrorbrain (ok, it is a little more advanced). We just
lack a server and someone to implement this. To make it more effective
we'd also need some pacman modifications.
--
Pierre Schmitz,
On 10/27/2010 02:03 AM, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:55 AM, PyroPeterabi1...@googlemail.com wrote:
To actually track the tcp-traffic (indirectly containing the name of
the requested package) archlinux.org would have to _proxy_ the traffic
(_all_ data would go _twice_ through
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 20:03:30 -0400, Kaiting Chen kaitocr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Not true, Arch could set up a round robin proxy to other mirrors such that
when a package is requested it returns a HTTP 302 or HTTP 303 redirect. Then
the only network traffic routed through Arch servers would only be
This is called mirrorbrain (ok, it is a little more advanced). We just
lack a server and someone to implement this. To make it more effective
we'd also need some pacman modifications.
--
Pierre Schmitz,
https://users.archlinux.de/~pierrehttps://users.archlinux.de/%7Epierre
Holy shit I
On Wed 27 Oct 2010 08:35 -0700, Aaron Bull Schaefer wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:53 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote:
I wouldn't say that. I would say that the only users who matter are the
ones that participate. For example you can't justly complain about the
results of an
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Ray Rashif sc...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 26 October 2010 07:48, Christopher Brannon ch...@the-brannons.com wrote:
Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org writes:
I'd say only remove the packages that are orphans.
Here's the list of [community] orphans with less than
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 03:46:56AM -0400, Eric Bélanger wrote:
If it hasn't been done, someone needs to check to make sure that they
are not {make,opt}depends of other non-orphaned packages.
Done. ucl is a makedepend of upx, gpsmanshp an optdep of gpsman. That's
it :)
On 2010-10-26 08:20 +0800 (43:2)
Ray Rashif wrote:
On 26 October 2010 07:48, Christopher Brannon ch...@the-brannons.com wrote:
Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org writes:
I'd say only remove the packages that are orphans.
Here's the list of [community] orphans with less than 1% usage,
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Xyne x...@archlinux.ca wrote:
I can see the point of removing orphans but I still think that using pkgstats
as a metric is a bad idea for everything else. Casual users, i.e. those who
are
not actively involved on the forum or IRC won't even be aware of
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 08:29:38 -0700
Aaron Bull Schaefer aa...@elasticdog.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Xyne x...@archlinux.ca wrote:
I can see the point of removing orphans but I still think that
using pkgstats as a metric is a bad idea for everything else.
Casual users, i.e.
Am Dienstag 26 Oktober 2010, 16:55:27 schrieb PyroPeter:
On 10/26/2010 05:40 AM, Kaiting Chen wrote:
Unrelated but thinking ahead, would it be possible to go ahead and get
rid of /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist and pull from a main
http://www.archlinux.org/repository? Then have that repository
Am 26.10.2010 20:05, schrieb Michael Düll:
Why not let pacman do the job (similar to how yaourt uses aurvote)?
Let pacman send a ping to some server like aurvote does.
Michael
Because pacman is a distro agnostic tool. Other distros do not have
something like the AUR.
Not true, Arch could set up a round robin proxy to other mirrors such that
when a package is requested it returns a HTTP 302 or HTTP 303 redirect. Then
the only network traffic routed through Arch servers would only be the
request HTTP headers which is quite insubstantial but would still allow
On Tue 26 Oct 2010 16:36 +0200, Xyne wrote:
On 2010-10-26 08:20 +0800 (43:2) Ray Rashif wrote:
I take back part of what I mentioned earlier. There are indeed some
packages that I believe no one uses. The best way to handle this is to
selectively remove each package that we still want to
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that roughly 50% of the
packages in [community] are not installed by anyone.
Can we get a list of these unused packages? Would it be a good idea to
start moving them to [unsupported]?
--
On 10/25/2010 01:35 PM, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been pollinghttps://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that roughly 50% of the
packages in [community] are not installed by anyone.
Can we get a list of these unused packages? Would it be a
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that roughly 50% of the
packages in [community] are not installed by anyone.
The page doesn't show the whole database.
--
Florian Pritz
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that roughly 50% of the
packages in [community] are not
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:13:18 +0100, Brieuc ROBLIN
brieuc.rob...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several
On 25 October 2010 16:13, Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:13:18 +0100, Brieuc ROBLIN
brieuc.rob...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net
wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been
Brieuc ROBLIN wrote:
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that roughly 50% of the
packages
Well, we can discuss the generated list of the unused packages, I'd be
agree if a package that I maintain it will be removed (in fact is not
remove at all, is a move to AUR) if it's unused.
Cheers
--
Angel Velásquez
angvp @ irc.freenode.net
Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User
Linux Counter:
On 10/25/2010 08:49 PM, Ángel Velásquez wrote:
Well, we can discuss the generated list of the unused packages, I'd be
agree if a package that I maintain it will be removed (in fact is not
remove at all, is a move to AUR) if it's unused.
Cheers
here is the list
On Monday 25 October 2010 19:50:16 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
here is the list http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community_cleanup
I agree to remove them too. At least packages with 0% of usage can be removed.
--
Andrea Scarpino
Arch Linux Developer
Am 25.10.2010 19:46, schrieb Xyne:
Brieuc ROBLIN wrote:
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Andrea Scarpino and...@archlinux.orgwrote:
On Monday 25 October 2010 19:50:16 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
here is the list http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community_cleanup
I agree to remove them too. At least packages with 0% of usage can be
removed.
--
Andrea
On 10/25/2010 09:22 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
On Monday 25 October 2010 19:50:16 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
here is the list http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community_cleanup
I agree to remove them too. At least packages with 0% of usage can be removed.
lets don't rush. first lets discuss what
Xyne x...@archlinux.ca writes:
Not all users submit stats so unless Arch installs spyware on everyone's
system
or pools download stats from the mirrors, those states are not sufficient to
motivate removals.
That's an excellent point. It is also fairly trivial to submit bogus data,
though I
It looks like someone cleaned up extra :)
xf86-input-mutouch was removed and I can not find it in aur.
On 10/25/2010 09:22 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
On Monday 25 October 2010 19:50:16 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
here is the list http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community_cleanup
I agree to remove them too. At least packages with 0% of usage can be
removed.
lets don't rush. first lets
On 25.10.2010 23:41, archli...@michael.trunner.de wrote:
Hi,
I think there are some server packages, for example ejabberd and
roundcubemail. These packages are only interesting for root servers, but not
for desktop computers. But I think they should stay in community, because
there are not so
On 10/25/2010 10:34 PM, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
It looks like someone cleaned up extra :)
xf86-input-mutouch was removed and I can not find it in aur.
yes
Date: Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 13:19:02
Author: jgc
Revision: 96932
Remove, no longer supported or developed upstream
Deleted:
On 25 October 2010 18:35, Christopher Brannon ch...@the-brannons.com wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks, and I've noticed that roughly 50% of the
packages in [community] are not installed by anyone.
Can we get a list of these
I'd say only remove the packages that are orphans. There is no point
removing packages that currently have a maintainer, but TUs should look
at their list of packages and consider whether some of them are really
needed...
Allan
Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org writes:
I'd say only remove the packages that are orphans.
Here's the list of [community] orphans with less than 1% usage, according
to pkgstats:
http://paste.xinu.at/98f5
-- Chris
pgpjyyTkPiisA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 26 October 2010 07:48, Christopher Brannon ch...@the-brannons.com wrote:
Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org writes:
I'd say only remove the packages that are orphans.
Here's the list of [community] orphans with less than 1% usage, according
to pkgstats:
http://paste.xinu.at/98f5
OK that's
On Mon 25 Oct 2010 19:46 +0200, Xyne wrote:
Brieuc ROBLIN wrote:
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling https://archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
regularly for several weeks,
Wow there are some really big name packages on that list. Cacti, freeradius,
ajaxterm, etc. I'm using at least 10 packages on the filtered list. I would
hate to see them removed.
Kaiting.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Ray Rashif sc...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 26 October 2010 07:48,
Can you vote on packages in community? Also wouldn't it make more sense to
pull the usage data from the download servers?
Kaiting.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon 25 Oct 2010 19:46 +0200, Xyne wrote:
Brieuc ROBLIN wrote:
On 25 October 2010
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon 25 Oct 2010 19:46 +0200, Xyne wrote:
Not all users submit stats so unless Arch installs spyware on
everyone's system or pools download stats from the mirrors, those
states are not sufficient to motivate
On 26 October 2010 10:38, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon 25 Oct 2010 19:46 +0200, Xyne wrote:
Brieuc ROBLIN wrote:
On 25 October 2010 15:06, Florian Pritz bluew...@server-speed.net wrote:
On 25.10.2010 12:35, Christopher Brannon wrote:
I've been polling
41 matches
Mail list logo
