From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 6 13:51:13 2007 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D5F216A469 for <freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org>; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 13:51:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from miguel@anjos.strangled.net) Received: from mailrly07.isp.novis.pt (mailrly07.isp.novis.pt [195.23.133.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 790F213C469 for <freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org>; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 13:51:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from miguel@anjos.strangled.net) Received: (qmail 27362 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2007 13:24:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailfrt02.isp.novis.pt) ([195.23.133.194]) (envelope-sender <miguel@anjos.strangled.net>) by mailrly07.isp.novis.pt with compressed SMTP; 6 Oct 2007 13:24:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 27686 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2007 13:24:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO satan.anjos.strangled.net) ([89.181.41.161]) (envelope-sender <miguel@anjos.strangled.net>) by mailfrt02.isp.novis.pt with SMTP; 6 Oct 2007 13:24:30 -0000 Received: from satan.anjos.strangled.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by satan.anjos.strangled.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l95C5vbI002503; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:05:59 +0100 (WEST) (envelope-from miguel@satan.anjos.strangled.net) Received: (from miguel@localhost) by satan.anjos.strangled.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l95C5u3r002502; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:05:56 +0100 (WEST) (envelope-from miguel) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:05:56 +0100 (WEST) From: Miguel Lopes Santos Ramos <miguel@anjos.strangled.net> Message-Id: <200710051205.l95C5u3r002502@satan.anjos.strangled.net> To: scrappy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <FC939F6458B279E947BD7B52@ganymede.hub.org> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSDstats Statistics for Sept, 2007 ... 12 769 Hosts Reported In X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism <freebsd-advocacy.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy>, <mailto:freebsd-advocacy-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-advocacy> List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-advocacy-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy>, <mailto:freebsd-advocacy-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 13:51:13 -0000 > From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@freebsd.org> [...] > Percentage Change in September from August: > > Overall +12.8% [...] > FreeBSD - 7.4% (5008 hosts) Numbers have gone down as to what FreeBSD is concerned. I think it's because the bsdstats script is becoming a bit of a pain... - The script keeps being changed and updated... - The script now wants to run on startup, which is a pain. Why? What was wrong with monthly reports? Why the haste? In my case it runs before an HTTP proxy is up and running... I had to disable it. Why on earth enabled by default? That's not what most ports do... The FreeBSD user is usually expected to manually enable the port after installing it. - Only now I realised that it is still reporting monthly... Otherwise it would have been deactivated for my machine. While a lot of us understands the interest of this, and even takes the time to take a look at how it's done, we also don't have the time to keep peting it every time it changes behaviour. The first reaction might be uninstall the port. Also, I think the enabled by default thing is a very bad idea. Consider when you're deploying a BSD in an enterprise environment; not everybody might understand imediatly that it would be beneficial to have that thing reporting automatically and by default... Greetings, Miguel