Re: Two more corrupt .debs found from 2.2_rev0 images
I say regenerate regardless.
Phil.
On 20 Aug 2000, Philip Hands wrote:
> 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
>
> OK.
>
> 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
> ASAP.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Cheers, Phil.
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
>
-
Philip Charles; 39a Paterson St., Abbotsford, New Zealand; +64 3 4882818
Mobile 025 267 9420. I sell GNU/Linux CDs. See http://www.copyleft.co.nz
Reply to: