Package download statistics

[Pierre Abbat]

On Sunday, June 02, 2013 14:32:44 John Marino wrote:
> The bigger question, of course, is *why* pkgsrc users are likely to
> build from source?  Could it be that they had lots of issues with that
> in the past?  Who wouldn't want something fast and quick if it were
> trustworthy?  The "indication" alone is telling.

Yes. IIRR the kde4 metapackage and some big chunks of KDE are missing from the 
current repo in 64-bit, but available in 32-bit. I think it was a license not 
allowed on the package building box. In some past quarters, the 32-bit 
packages (I didn't have a 64-bit machine) weren't built at all.

On Sunday, June 02, 2013 11:42:54 Justin Sherrill wrote:
> I'm the fool that was building the pkgsrc binaries, and _I_ was
> recommending that people use pkg-rolling_replace - it led to the least
> amount of surprise for people.  We have never had a good,
> always-up-to-date collection of binaries for pkgsrc, and there's a
> number of reasons: the person building them (me) wasn't the person
> fixing them, the person fixing them would burn out from the work, the
> build cycle took weeks when it worked, the build cycle would take even
> longer when it didn't work, pkgsrc traditionally was a from-source
> system, I am an idiot, etc.

pkg-rolling_replace requires several restarts. It's better to build all the 
binary packages on an empty system, then use pkgin to replace them.

Pierre
-- 
li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du
li ci su'i ze te'a mu bi'e vu'u ci