I don't have names for you in that question, but I do have numbers. I make perl software depots available for all architectures I have direct access to, and put them on-line as soon as I have time to do so. For 5.12.2 other (payed) work delayed my doing so quite a bit, but here are the dates I put perl-5.12.2 on-line and the number of downloads I get from (just two of the four) mirrors to see if those serve a purpose:
| Dec 22 11:50 | 2 | perl-5.12.2-10.20.sd.bz |
| Dec 16 17:45 | 3 | perl-5.12.2-11.00.sd.bz |
| Nov 29 12:58 | 110 | perl-5.12.2-11.11.sd.bz |
| Nov 25 11:47 | 57 | perl-5.12.2-11.23-ia64.sd.bz |
| Nov 03 14:46 | 13 | perl-5.12.2-11.31-ia64.sd.bz |
The top 3 are PA-RISC, the bottom two are Itanium. The top 3 are not actively supported anymore by HP or HP's porting center.
Enjoy, Have FUN! H.Merijn
| [reply] |
Let's face it. It ain't gonna change any time soon, regardless of my opinion, so what follows is just hot air.
And, given that you are contributing and performing a service for others on your own time, it would be churlish to criticise you. And what follows is not criticism.
But :)...I've never understood why people--not you, but your downloaders--are content to stay with an OS that is 10 years out of service, but must have the very latest build of Perl on those systems?
Much less why we pander to their penchant for considering the failure to support the latest builds of perl on their ancient unsupported OSs, somehow reflects badly on Perl-kind, rather than on them?
Don't feel the need to respond further. I'm just thinking aloud about things that confuse me, but over which I can have no influence.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
| [reply] |