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

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

On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 10:18:38AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> "J.A. Bezemer" <costar@panic.et.tudelft.nl> writes:
> > In fact, I've just corrected my private copy of the Bin-2 image (how I love
> > mc(1)! Offset 0x148554de), the new md5sum of the image is:
> > 
> > be04cd6d17159d66978ad227b26ed17d  binary-i386-2.iso
> > 
> I quite like this idea -- the only problem is that we don't know if
> there are bit errors outside the package files (i.e. in the files
> generated during the debian-cd run).
> Given that it's a single bit error, it will rsync quickly.
> So. Are we going to simply mention the two md5sums in the release
> notes, with the fix if you happen to have the one with a bit error?
Any posibility to have a script or something that performs this bitflip?
And maybe something that can correct the deb for already burned CDs on

> Does anyone have any fundamental objections to this?
> I'm a bit uncomfortable about having two versions of the same thing
> around, but given that it's a simple data error, it seems reasonable
> to allow people to fix it if they realise there's a problem, and it's
> not too serious if they don't realise, because there's an easy to
> work-around.
I got a report from somebody whom I have sent the "corrupt" CDs. He upgraded
from slink, wanted to install pdksh. He says the upgrade procedure stopped,
he rebooted and got into sever problems (X unconfigured, etc). He had severe
problems and the windows users he wanted to impress had big fun...
I don't blame anybody, but its quite embarassing (I wouldn't have thought
anybody uses this package...).

We should fix this as soon as possible and mention it on a prominent webpage
(last minute release notes?). If we discuss for some time about a version
number change or not, it might take much longer unter a fixed image is

Reply to: