On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 5 July 2016 at 06:46, Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 07/05/2016 11:09 AM, Adrian Reber wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 10:04:03AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Timely article in the Register today: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/05/linux_letting_go_32bit_builds_on_the_way_out/ >>>>> >>>>> I've been thinking about this as i686 is so often broken that I've now >>>>> stopped bothering to test it in the libguestfs tests that I do on >>>>> Rawhide: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/libguestfs.git/commit/?id=aa63cef2d7679e1906551ef4e46c2e9a8861b56c >>>>> >>>>> If you need to run an i686 virtual machine based on Rawhide, my >>>>> experience is that it's more likely than not that it won't boot, and >>>>> no one cares. >>>>> >>>>> Do we have stats for the relative proportion of i686 vs x86-64 >>>>> downloads? >>>> >>>> >>>> No really because of mirrors etc, but mirror manager stats from Feb >>>> (FPL DevConf talk) list i686 as around 20% unique IP hits, that >>>> doesn't take into account proxies/NAT using same IP etc. >>> >>> >>> What clients are requesting from MirrorManager can also be seen here: >>> >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager/statistics/2016-07-05/archs >> >> >> These statistics do not cover package downloads of i686 packages which are >> part of the x86_64 repositories, do they? >> >> I think the numbers are also skewed by the fact that EPEL 7 is not available >> for i686, which is not of direct relevance to Fedora. (The reason why it's >> missing is not lack of demand, but lack of a publicly available build root >> for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 on i686.) >> > > Here is a graph for just Fedora OS from time immemorial of Fedora > using a 7 day moving average. > > https://smooge.fedorapeople.org/simple_stats/fedora-hardware-full-ma.png > > I hope this is helpful.. [I am working on ways to make this available > regularly but am up to my neck in spam accounts so don;'t expect > soon.] That doesn't seem to distinguish between "ppc" and "ppc64" at first glance, which I would think we'd want it to. Particularly since "ppc" isn't a thing that has existed in installable form for a while now. Further, it doesn't distinguish between "ppc64" and "ppc64p7", which are actually separate architectures in the koji sense. I realize the lines might be virtually invisible on the graph with a further breakdown, but I'm curious if the statistics themselves are being gathered properly there. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
