[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Two more corrupt .debs found from 2.2_rev0 images

Heikki Vatiainen <hessu@cs.tut.fi> writes:

> After checking all the CD images for all the architectures, I found
> two more corrupt files. The sparc images I tested were 
> 2.2_rev0_CDa versions, the old 2.2_rev0 images were not tested. 
> Testing included _only_ .deb files
> Here's what I found.
> binary-powerpc-1_NONUS.iso
> ==========================
> dists/potato/main/binary-powerpc/otherosfs/smbfs_2.0.7-3.deb
>    2e2c1d222b3cdb9db70ebf09634994c2, correct is
>    92725d3d06262927fee42029c308f84e
> binary-powerpc-3.iso
> ====================
> dists/potato/main/binary-all/doc/gimp-manual_1.0.0-4.deb
>    5824b918062f3ad9d9a2b08c97b78634, correct is
>    f01a6b0eb32c8dc38cc5f52067eb2ae9


Well that's a relief (to some extent) in that I was dreading coming
back after the weekend, only to find that I'd totally stuffed up the
CD production run.

Now, we have a decision to make -- should we leave these images
(until 2.2_rev1), or should I generate 2.2_rev0_CDa images for those
where errors have been discovered.

It seems that i386 have at least one broken file, powerpc have at
least 2, and alpha are not bootable without a minor fix.

So that only leaves arm & powerpc without some reason (so far) for
rebuilding them.  Should I just do the whole lot again?

If I were to redo any/all of the CDs, it would only be after I replace
almost all the hardware on the cdimage.d.o machine, and then check the
checksums of all the archive mirror.

I may be able to do that tomorrow, if we decide we need to urgently
regenerate the images, otherwise I'll probably do the hardware upgrade
Tuesday, and then just wait for 2.2_rev1 to come around.

What do people think?  It seems that the images we have are pretty
much OK, but is that good enough?  I think we should aim for
perfection, and in the past there has been a tendency to say that we
cannot muck about with things after release, with the end result being
that our users ended up suffering fixable bugs for much longer than
was really necessary.

Of course, if it seems likely that 2.2_r1 will be with us in a week or
two, then we should probably just wait for that.

If anyone's found anything more disastrous wrong with the current crop
of CDs, then we should probably get on with producing the new set


Cheers, Phil.

Reply to: