Re: Missing files and reported checksum errors in i386 amd64 jigdo dvd
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 02:41:29PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:52:55AM +0100, ael wrote:
>>On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:58:05PM -0700, Robert Key wrote:
>>> Hi since the 11 April I have had problems with the jigdo builds for i386, amd64.
>>> i386 image2 has 2 missing files
>>> i386 image4 has 4 missing files which cannot be found, I have tried MANY mirror sites
>>>
>>> jigdo tells me CHECKSUM ERROR on image1 and image5, 6, 7 which are successfully build however when I run md5sum on the images they are correct.
>>> They match the md5sums in MD5SUM.large!
>>> Is there a checksum in the jigdo or template file which is incorrect?
>>>
>>
>>I have been having similar problems. I posted here about the checksum
>>errors on the i386_DVD.6.. . Steve suggested that it might have been a
>>temporary problem, but I have repeated my downloads with fresh jigdo and
>>template files, and still see the problem.
>>
>>As I reported, I *did* see a real (sha1) checksum errors.
>>
>>So there really is something peculiar going on. I was looking for a tool
>>to checksum or verify the individual deb files, but haven't found
>>anything so far. debsig-verify and the like seem only to check installed
>>files. I have probably forgotten something obvious.
>>
>>So I confirm that there is something amiss...
>
>Sorry guys, no joy on tracking this down on the server yet. I have
>since finished fully commissioning the new CD builder so it's doing
>all the dailies and weeklies. The previous set of weekly builds would
>have been using an older set of squeeze packages as the mirror wasn't
>totally up to date. Even that might be the cause of the problems
>you've been seeing. Can you try again with the current set of jigdo
>files and let me know how you get on please?
Actually, scratch that. I'm seeing the problem now too. :-( More news
as and when I have some.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
We don't need no education.
We don't need no thought control.
Reply to: