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

Re: BUG: Debian 11 version of bibletime



On Sb, 18 dec 21, 07:00:56, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > 
> > Please demonstrate this by showing us the actual run of apt-file as well
> > as the output of
> > 
> >      dpkg -L bibletime-data
 
Care to provide these as well?
 
> richard@debian-11:~$ su
> Password:
> root@debian-11:/home/richard# dpkg -l bibletime\*
> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
> |
> Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
> |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
> ||/ Name           Version      Architecture Description
> +++-==============-============-============-==================================>
> ii  bibletime      3.0-5        amd64        bible study tool for Qt
> ii  bibletime-data 3.0-5        all          Documentation and data for
> bibleti>
> un  bibletime-i18n <none>       <none>       (no description available)
> lines 1-8/8 (END)
> 
> I see the same on Sid. In both cases Synaptic states the repository is
>        http://deb.debian.org/debian
> 
> I've also found https://deb.debian.org/ which states:
> > The server deb.debian.org does not have packages itself, but the name has
> > SRV records in DNS that let apt in stretch and later find places.
> 
> The *LAST* package installed by Synaptic was bibletime. In which log-file do
> I look to find the *EXACT* URL bibletime was retrieved from.
> 
> IIRC there is some load sharing going on in the background which would
> account for me retrieving different files than others.

See https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/all/bibletime-data/download for 
the MD5 checksum (if you worry about integrity) and the SHA256 checksum 
(if you worry about tampering) of the .deb file.

You can compare these against the .deb file in /var/cache/apt/archives.

My money is on a match and this is a blind alley.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: