DJA wrote:
Ralph Shumaker wrote:
Tom Gal wrote:
Worked Back then = RH9 came before FC3.
Either:
1) The test was always messed up, in which case you're wasting your
time either way -OR-
2) The people in charge of fedora supplanted a functional CD test
with a non-functional error prone test which still makes it sound
like you're wasting your time.
2a) The testing software became messed up, which means that an older
version should still be reliable.
2b) The checksum, MD5, or whatnot is what became messed up, which
means that the testing software doesn't have a chance, regardless of
version.
Granted, I do not know *how* the media testing software actually
tests the media. I don't know how it can know whether any particular
bit is supposed to be on or off. So I assume it must be some kind of
elaborate checksum type of thing.
I'll make it easier for you. As I remember, the chronic problem with
the CD testing code in FC4 was that almost always said one or more
CD's were bad when in fact they weren't. I don't remember it reporting
bad CD's as good.
So...Given the length of time it takes to run the tests on all four
CD's anyway, you won't lose much time if you just do the install and
it ends up barfing due to bad media. Think of the install as its own
media test. And as has been pointed out, not even the first: your CD
burning software should have caught problems already if the ISO's
source was known to be good.
I did not burn the CDs. Neither do I have the ISOs.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
