Re: Has any one had any problem with install50.iso?
Seems I made some things quite unclear here...so, lemme put in a few
words I managed to leave out...
On 11/03/11 18:45, Nick Holland wrote:
On 11/03/11 17:02, Johan Ryberg wrote:
Hi there
I has done some testing with install50.iso and USB stick installations
and yesterday I had problem with corrupt packages like xetc50.tgz and
others and I wanted to debug what happened but today every things
works perfectly.
_corrupt_, or checksum mismatches? HUGE difference.
I haven't changed any scripts that I'm using and the only thing that
is a unknown factor is install50.iso that I downloaded several times
yesterday and several times today. I don't have yesterdays downloaded
iso stored but I'm started to think that the iso was corrupt. I where
using ftp.eu.openbsd.org.
Has any one else experienced any problem with install50.iso?
I don't like loose ends =(
neither do I. :)
Unfortunately, you are very short on details.
Any good OpenBSD mirror will have about 18 files with the name
install50.iso.
that would be nine 5.0-release files, and nine post 5.0 snapshots. It
was not exactly appropriate to assume that people would correctly guess
what I was referring to there.
Some (half!) of them should be absolutely perfect.
The releases, that is.
The other half
the snapshots
will be likely to have checksum mismatches ('specially in
s/will be likely/will potentially from time to time/
things like the X file sets), and are also prone to changes on the fly,
which may result in interesting issues, as they may be updated once a
day (or more. or less).
It was possible to interpret what I said as indicating that many mirrors
may have bad data, and that's just ok. NO IT ISN'T.
Mirrors should not have bad data.
Mirrors should be well maintained and monitored (and hopefully, USED by
those who maintain them!).
Again, mirrors should not have bad data.
Mirrors shipping bad, old, or incomplete data are an error condition
that needs to be fixed. If you spot a bad mirror, bring it up with the
mirror maintainers AND OpenBSD developers, WITH complete information! --
what mirror, what problem you see, exactly where you see it, etc.
(making us guess what and where you are experiencing is not helpful)
Nick.
Has any one had any problem with install50.iso?
Hi there I has done some testing with install50.iso and USB stick installations and yesterday I had problem with corrupt packages like xetc50.tgz and others and I wanted to debug what happened but today every things works perfectly. I haven't changed any scripts that I'm using and the only thing that is a unknown factor is install50.iso that I downloaded several times yesterday and several times today. I don't have yesterdays downloaded iso stored but I'm started to think that the iso was corrupt. I where using ftp.eu.openbsd.org. Has any one else experienced any problem with install50.iso? I don't like loose ends =( Best regards Johan
Re: Has any one had any problem with install50.iso?
Hi Johan, Have you checked the SHA256 sig with the iso? They can be found here: http://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/5.0/arch/SHA256 If you don't have an OpenBSD installation already running to use the sha256 command, you can pick up tools over on sourceforge http://md5deep.sourceforge.net/ that can help you out with whatever platform you are running. Cheers, Jason. -- Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads - Dr. Emmett Doc Brown
Re: Has any one had any problem with install50.iso?
On 11/03/11 17:02, Johan Ryberg wrote:
Hi there
I has done some testing with install50.iso and USB stick installations
and yesterday I had problem with corrupt packages like xetc50.tgz and
others and I wanted to debug what happened but today every things
works perfectly.
_corrupt_, or checksum mismatches? HUGE difference.
I haven't changed any scripts that I'm using and the only thing that
is a unknown factor is install50.iso that I downloaded several times
yesterday and several times today. I don't have yesterdays downloaded
iso stored but I'm started to think that the iso was corrupt. I where
using ftp.eu.openbsd.org.
Has any one else experienced any problem with install50.iso?
I don't like loose ends =(
neither do I. :)
Unfortunately, you are very short on details.
Any good OpenBSD mirror will have about 18 files with the name
install50.iso.
Some (half!) of them should be absolutely perfect.
The other half will be likely to have checksum mismatches ('specially in
things like the X file sets), and are also prone to changes on the fly,
which may result in interesting issues, as they may be updated once a
day (or more. or less).
So, what you are reporting is either a big problem, or a non-issue.
Probably not both. Maybe a random network glitch.
Nick.
Re: Has any one had any problem with install50.iso?
The problem was on my side. I found the problem in the building scripts.
Thanks anyway
Regards Johan
Den 3 nov 2011 23:45 skrev Nick Holland n...@holland-consulting.net:
On 11/03/11 17:02, Johan Ryberg wrote:
Hi there
I has done some testing with install50.iso and USB stick installations
and yesterday I had problem with corrupt packages like xetc50.tgz and
others and I wanted to debug what happened but today every things
works perfectly.
_corrupt_, or checksum mismatches? HUGE difference.
I haven't changed any scripts that I'm using and the only thing that
is a unknown factor is install50.iso that I downloaded several times
yesterday and several times today. I don't have yesterdays downloaded
iso stored but I'm started to think that the iso was corrupt. I where
using ftp.eu.openbsd.org.
Has any one else experienced any problem with install50.iso?
I don't like loose ends =(
neither do I. :)
Unfortunately, you are very short on details.
Any good OpenBSD mirror will have about 18 files with the name
install50.iso.
Some (half!) of them should be absolutely perfect.
The other half will be likely to have checksum mismatches ('specially in
things like the X file sets), and are also prone to changes on the fly,
which may result in interesting issues, as they may be updated once a
day (or more. or less).
So, what you are reporting is either a big problem, or a non-issue.
Probably not both. Maybe a random network glitch.
Nick.
