On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 09:07:00PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>
>>Please fix the broken packages on cdimage.debian.org
>
>Thanks for reporting, looking at this now.
Having written a script to fully check the snapshot bits for 12.6, I
found some more files int snapsho that were broken as well as
Hi Matthias!
On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 01:11:17PM +0200, M. Buecher wrote:
>Package: cdimage.debian.org
>Version: 12.6
>
>Jigdo downloading the update DVDs for Debian 12.6.0 from cdimage.debian.org
>fails.
>
>Update DVDs #1 and #3 fail to complete due to packages
>crowdsec
Package: cdimage.debian.org
Version: 12.6
Jigdo downloading the update DVDs for Debian 12.6.0 from cdimage.debian.org
fails.
Update DVDs #1 and #3 fail to complete due to packages
crowdsec-custom-bouncer_0.0.15-3+b2_amd64.deb and
termshark_2.4.0-1+b6_amd64.deb
onhttp://cdimage.debian.org
Hi Marcelo,
On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 12:25:49PM -0300, Marcelo B. wrote:
>Hi guys, there seem to be a problem with AMD64's jigdo files of the weekly
>builds: they're all the same at 120 bytes in size.
ACK, thanks for reporting. I'll take a look.
--
Steve Mc
Hi guys, there seem to be a problem with AMD64's jigdo files of the weekly
builds: they're all the same at 120 bytes in size.
Regards.
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 05:48:52PM +0100, Thomas Lange wrote:
>
>I would guess he means the
>debian-12.4.0-amd64-DVD-17.jigdo in the directory
>
>https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-dvd/
Right. I've tested DVD17 here and it rebuilds just fine. Can you as
I would guess he means the
debian-12.4.0-amd64-DVD-17.jigdo in the directory
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-dvd/
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 16:43:07 +, Steve McIntyre
>>>>> said:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 09:03:47AM +01
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 09:03:47AM +0100, Thomas Lange wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've contacted some CD vendors that were providing old Debian releases
>to update to the newest release. One of them replied, that
>he was unable to create DVD17 with the jigdo file both i386 and
>
Hi,
Thomas Lange wrote:
> Maybe you can check if there's a problem with DVD17.
What's the exact URL of .jigdo and .template file which was tried ?
For now i tested the offer for amd64 debian-12.4.0 (demonstrating the wget
workaround for a long fixed bug in older jigdo-lit
Hi,
I've contacted some CD vendors that were providing old Debian releases
to update to the newest release. One of them replied, that
he was unable to create DVD17 with the jigdo file both i386 and
amd64. He asked for an alternative download of the ISO but IIRC we do
not provide torrent
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> We don't provide firmware-included
> versions of every media type, just netinst and DVD.
sp...@caiway.net wrote:
> > Perhaps you can give me the link with info how to make my own files
> > *.jigdo & *.template
> For that, you'
re-edu-11.2.0-amd64-BD-1* in place, similarly to the
>> firmware-edu-11.1.0-amd64-BD-1.* that we did for 11.1 (etc.)
>
>Hi!,
>
>firmware-11.2.0-amd64-DVD-1.jigdo
>firmware-11.2.0-amd64-DVD-1.template
>
>do excist
>
>firmware-edu-11.2.0-amd64-BD-1.jigdo also, bu
Hi!
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:52:31AM +0100, sp...@caiway.net wrote:
>
>The non-free firmware unofficial BD jigdo files for release 11.2 are
>still missing. I only checked for the amd64 systems.
>
>Will they be published?
Ummm. What files are you expecting? I can see
firmware-e
Hi,
The non-free firmware unofficial BD jigdo files for release 11.2 are
still missing. I only checked for the amd64 systems.
Will they be published?
Thanks!
Arne
Hi Ivan,
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 07:08:14PM +0300, Ivan Petroff wrote:
>When downloading debian-11.0.0-amd64-DVD-6.iso and debian-11.0.0-amd64-BD-2.iso
>images I got next error (and yes, I tried different mirrors):
>
>Could not open `.\tmp/debian-11.0.0-amd64-DVD-6.iso.tmpdir\snapshot.debian.org\
When downloading debian-11.0.0-amd64-DVD-6.iso
and debian-11.0.0-amd64-BD-2.iso images I got next error (and yes, I
tried different mirrors):
Could not open `.\tmp/debian-11.0.0-amd64-DVD-6.iso.tmpdir\
snapshot.debian.org\archive\debian\20210815T100244Z\pool\main\e\ettercap\ettercap-common_0.8.3.1
Steve McIntyre writes:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 03:01:54PM +0200, epsommum...@virgilio.it wrote:
>>I am now using the BluRay image which contains Spyder and its dependencies,
>>so I am fine.
>>
>>But obviously there is a problem with the current algo being used if
>>the dependencies of a softwa
epsommum...@virgilio.it writes:
> I am now using the BluRay image which contains Spyder and its dependencies,
> so I am fine.
Unless the machine you're running this on is isolated from the Internet,
you could just have added any of the many servers in our mirror network
to apt's sources.list and
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 03:01:54PM +0200, epsommum...@virgilio.it wrote:
>I am now using the BluRay image which contains Spyder and its dependencies, so
>I am fine.
>
>But obviously there is a problem with the current algo being used if
>the dependencies of a software end up in an ISO but not the
I am now using the BluRay image which contains Spyder and its dependencies, so
I am fine.
But obviously there is a problem with the current algo being used if the
dependencies of a software end up in an ISO but not the software actually
depending on them.
I remember being surprised by the size
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 03:40:54AM +0200, epsommum...@virgilio.it wrote:
>Hi Steve!
>
>The 16GB image is actually less than 15GB.
Incorrect. Checking the size in the jigdo file:
Image size 15909054464 bytes
>The Spyder package is 200kb.
>There is ample room.
>Someone who does
dependencies or add the small Spyder package, but
leaving things as they are makes no sense.
Cheers !
> Il 28/07/2021 22:54 Steve McIntyre ha scritto:
>
>
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 08:26:53PM +0200, epsommum...@virgilio.it wrote:
> >
> >The Spyder package is miss
Hi!
On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 08:26:53PM +0200, epsommum...@virgilio.it wrote:
>
>The Spyder package is missing from jigdo amd64 weekly 16 GB stick ISO.
>
>All its dependencies are there like python3-spyder, but since spyder
>itself is missing, spyder can not be used.
>
>https
Hi !
The Spyder package is missing from jigdo amd64 weekly 16 GB stick ISO.
All its dependencies are there like python3-spyder, but since spyder itself is
missing, spyder can not be used.
https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/amd64/jigdo-16G/
https://packages.debian.org/fr/sid
[ Re-adding the CC to the mailing list; please respond there too ]
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 01:17:16PM +0200, valentí juanola wrote:
>It works. I apologize for my ignorance. Thank you very much, Steve. Have a nice
>life.
OK, so it seems you need to repair your system's locale
information. I'd recom
gt; >LC_TELEPHONE="en_US.UTF-8"
> >LC_MEASUREMENT="en_US.UTF-8"
> >LC_IDENTIFICATION="en_US.UTF-8"
> >LC_ALL=
>
> OK. That checksum matches what I have here, so the template download
> is fine. What happens if you run "export
E="en_US.UTF-8"
>LC_ADDRESS="en_US.UTF-8"
>LC_TELEPHONE="en_US.UTF-8"
>LC_MEASUREMENT="en_US.UTF-8"
>LC_IDENTIFICATION="en_US.UTF-8"
>LC_ALL=
OK. That checksum matches what I have here, so the template download
is fine. What hap
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 11:57:48AM +0200, valentí juanola wrote:
>Dear Steve
>Thanks for your help. All Dvds give the same error message...
So what checksum do you get for the template file please?
Also, checking your error message again, what does the command
"locale" say on your system?
--
St
Thanks, I'll check them out.
El dl., 7 de juny 2021, 13:46, Steve McIntyre va
escriure:
> Hi Valentí,
>
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 01:30:32PM +, valentí juanola wrote:
> >[profile_ma]
> >
> > [profile_ma]
> > Cannot download via jigdo because
&g
Hi Valentí,
On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 01:30:32PM +, valentí juanola wrote:
>[profile_ma]
>
> [profile_ma]
> Cannot download via jigdo because
>
> Jigdo downloads fail at address
> https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-dvd/
>
> file: debian-
Cannot download via jigdo because
Jigdo downloads fail at address
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-dvd/
file: debian-10.9.0-amd64-DVD-1.template
from: https://laotzu.ftp.acc.umu.se(???)
Debian mirror [ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/]:
jigdo-file
xde-CD DL via Jigdo does not
boot, "no Kernel found"
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a syst
Hi Bernd!
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 12:04:29PM +0100, Bernd Oelker (BeOP-IT) wrote:
>Hallo List,
>
>while update all debian dvd'2 from debian-9.11 to debian 9.12
>(arch=armhf) everything worked as expected for all
>
>debian-9.12.0-armhf-DVD-[1..13].jigdo files, the
>
>d
Hallo List,
while update all debian dvd'2 from debian-9.11 to debian 9.12
(arch=armhf) everything worked as expected for all
debian-9.12.0-armhf-DVD-[1..13].jigdo files, the
debian-update-9.12.0-armhf-DVD-[1.2].jigdo failed, because the remaining
*.deb files are not found ??
URL&#
Your message dated Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:04:05 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#949965: fixed in debian-cd 3.1.28
has caused the Debian Bug report #949965,
regarding Add support for jigdo v2 format
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Package: debian-cd
Version: 3.1.25
Severity: normal
Jigdo and jigit already have support for the new sha256-based
format. Add support in debian-cd for using it too.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.2
APT prefers stable-debug
APT policy: (500, 'stable-debug'), (500, '
gt;
>Add initial support for jigdo v2 format
>
>Add the option to switch to format v2 which uses sha256 everywhere
>instead of md5. We can't actually turn this on yet, need to wait for
>users to upgrade a bit and get new v2-aware jigdo clients.
>
>But
Hi!
On 1/2/20 11:56 AM, James Clarke wrote:
>> Any clues before I start digging?
>
> You need to export JIGDO_CHECKSUM in your CONF-ports.sh; see the commit
> message.
Yes, that helps. Thank you.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'
Hi!
With the changes from:
commit 0dd4219af48f2ffd9d86d6e79a71af4c9b813cf0 (HEAD -> master, origin/master,
origin/HEAD)
Author: Steve McIntyre
Date: Thu Nov 21 19:03:11 2019 +
Add initial support for jigdo v2 format
Add the option to switch to format v2 which uses sha
Hi Thomas!
I've just released jigit v1.22 with the embedded libjte 2.0.0. Here's
a (hopefully complete!) diff of the extra changes I've made on top of
xorriso 1.5.2, beyond simply copying in the libjte directory from my
new release. I've tested this for generating both jigdo f
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Let's go with "-jigdo-checksum-algorithm" to keep the separation?
The user is king.
Other mail:
I proposed to keep versioning and SONAME at 1
> > LIBJTE1 {
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Surely that works for upwards compatibility, but won'
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:04:31AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>SONAME comes from libjte/configure.ac. Dunno from where libburn got the
>slightly braindamaged way to compose it. From there it spread over the
>other libraries. libjte is its youngest victim. Shrug.
Right.
>The upstream revi
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:37:29PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>while exploring the need for adaptions in the build system of libsofs,
>i wonder whether it is really necessary to create LIBJTE2 in libjte.ver.
>Adding new functions is upward compatible.
>In my libraries i add them to the cur
are their only user i know of, as well as i am the only user of
>libjte.
>
>"-jigdo-checksum-algorithm" or "-checksum_algorithm_jigdo" ?
>
>"checksum_algorithm" or "checksum_jigdo" ?
>
>The latter already have similarily named neighbors i
Hi,
SONAME comes from libjte/configure.ac. Dunno from where libburn got the
slightly braindamaged way to compose it. From there it spread over the
other libraries. libjte is its youngest victim. Shrug.
The upstream revision "2.0.0" is not necessarily the .so suffix.
The macro values from libjte.h
Hi,
while exploring the need for adaptions in the build system of libsofs,
i wonder whether it is really necessary to create LIBJTE2 in libjte.ver.
Adding new functions is upward compatible.
In my libraries i add them to the current (and only) SONAME version.
Fine check for compatibility happens
like option names here, obviously -
> it's your code exposing them at the top level.
But you are their only user i know of, as well as i am the only user of
libjte.
"-jigdo-checksum-algorithm" or "-checksum_algorithm_jigdo" ?
"checksum_algorithm" or "checksu
set_checksum_path(jte, arg);
if(ret <= 0)
goto jte_failed;
xorriso->libjte_params_given|= 16;
@@ -813,6 +816,21 @@
if(ret <= 0)
goto jte_failed;
xorriso->libjte_params_given|= 2048;
+ } else if(strcmp(aspect, "checksum_algorithm") == 0 ||
+
hecksum type from the lines in the -md5-list
>file.
I'd prefer to have jigdo creators make an explicit choice in the
interface, rather than try to work it out automatically. It's easier
to not make mistakes that way. IMHO. Yes, I've chosen differently for
the make-image/jigit-mkima
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:30:09PM +0100, Richard Atterer wrote:
>Hi Steve,
>
>thank you very much for continuing to take care of jigdo! It's been a loong
>time since I actively worked on it. (Must have been ~2000 that I started
>creating it.)
>
>I've updated my si
Hi,
after finding
https://git.einval.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=jigit.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/sha256
https://git.einval.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=jigit.git;a=blob;f=libjte/libjte.h;hb=refs/heads/sha256
i now believe to understand that the new API call
int libjte_set_checksum_algorithm(struct
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> the external API for libjte is *very* close to what we had before.
Now i'm curious. I expected no need for a change, assumed that you'd
automagically detect the checksum type from the lines in the -md5-list
file.
> I've got a simple diff right now that I'm
> just cle
Hi Steve,
thank you very much for continuing to take care of jigdo! It's been a loong
time since I actively worked on it. (Must have been ~2000 that I started
creating it.)
I've updated my site to point to the URL you gave - does the text I used
work for you?
I think given that I
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this Bug report.
This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.
Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
interested parties for their attention; they will rep
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this Bug report.
This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.
Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
interested parties for their attention; they will rep
[ Sent to multiple people and Debian bugs - please respect the
reply-to and follow up on the debian-cd list if you have
replies/comments. ]
Hi folks!
For a while we've been working to move away from using MD5 in various
parts of Debian, and jigdo is one of the last few things that&#x
http://ftp.no.debian.org/debian-cd/9.8.0/amd64/jigdo-dlbd/
Hi can you help me With this:
https://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Debian-Jigdo/downloadingyourfirstimage.html
http://linux.csua.berkeley.edu/debian/
file not found error.
Why can you not make a Directory so its easy to build it?
Your message dated Sat, 02 Feb 2019 23:04:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#887830: fixed in debian-cd 3.1.22
has caused the Debian Bug report #887830,
regarding debian-cd: *.jigdo files should be listed in the *SUMS files
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Should all be in place now - please shout if anything else appears to
> be missing!
At the very end of my checks i notice that in
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-dvd/SHA512SUMS
there are no checksums for
debian-update-9.4.0-amd64-DVD
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 02:39:28PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 01:44:44PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:07:02PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>is there a particular reason why the checksums for .
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 01:44:44PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:07:02PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>is there a particular reason why the checksums for .jigdo and .template
>>files did not make it into the 9.4.0 release ?
>&g
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:07:02PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>is there a particular reason why the checksums for .jigdo and .template
>files did not make it into the 9.4.0 release ?
>
> https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-bd/SHA512SUMS
>
>
Hi,
is there a particular reason why the checksums for .jigdo and .template
files did not make it into the 9.4.0 release ?
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/jigdo-bd/SHA512SUMS
Steve announced them in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-cd/2018/02/msg00027.html
and they still
Hi,
Jordan Anderson wrote:
> Why do I get this error when I extract the jigdo-win folder and open
> up the .bat folder?
I doubt that support for Jigdo on MS-Windows is available here.
> Where do I start to download the .jigdo files?
If the goal in the end is to get Debian ISOs
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jordan Anderson
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 23:44:49 -0600
Subject: Error using jigdo
To: jigdo-u...@lists.berlios.de
Why do I get this error when I extract the jigdo-win folder and open
up the .bat folder? Where do I start to download the .jigdo files
at bottom :-
On 20/01/2018, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Package: debian-cd
> Severity: normal
> Tags: upstream
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> as described in
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-cd/2018/01/msg00019.html
> the *.jigdo files are not listed in the checksum fil
Package: debian-cd
Severity: normal
Tags: upstream
Dear Maintainer,
as described in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-cd/2018/01/msg00019.html
the *.jigdo files are not listed in the checksum files *SUMS.
There is no way provided to check the authenticity of *.jigdo before
downloading by jigdo
Hi,
Lou Poppler wrote on debian-cd@lists.debian.org:
> I would note that debian-live stable versions are also available via
> bittorrent, which probably has more peers available, and is easier on the
> mirrors.
I myself have no clue of bittorrent. So this part would need an author other
than me.
- Thomas Schmitt wrote:
[...]
> It would shorten JigdoOnLive if i could point to a guide about getting
> Debian Live, putting it on medium, and booting it.
I would note that debian-live stable versions are also available via
bittorrent, which probably has more peers available, and is easier
Hi,
i looked into jigdo-file about the safety of the final jigdo-lite statement
"OK: Checksums match, image is good!"
The message stems from
src/jigdo-file-cmd.cc
where i read
MD5Sum md; // MD5Sum of image
md.updateFromStream(*image, info->size(), readAmount, *optReporter)
Hi,
while working on my JigdoOnLive wiki page i got pointed by Paul Wise
to the fact that the "https:" URLs of cdimage.debian.org files do not
really protect their file content against tampering.
I am quite sure that the .jigdo files get not verified by jigdo-lite
beyond (possibly
Hi,
i started a wiki page
"Downloading Debian Jigdo ISOs by a Debian Live system"
https://wiki.debian.org/JigdoOnLive
and filled in my experiences about this task.
Help is needed to put some tangible info or examples into
https://wiki.debian.org/J
Hi,
on occasion of a user question on debian-cd
"Blueray Disk image"
https://lists.debian.org/debian-cd/2018/01/msg00010.html
i exercised the whole procedure of Jigdo download by help of Debian LiveCD:
debian-live-9.3.0-amd64-xfce.iso
It is bumpy. (But at least there is a termin
files.
Press Ctrl-C to abort. (If you re-run jigdo-lite later, it will
resume from here, the downloaded data is not lost if you press
Ctrl-C now.)
:
== end of example
Is the advise understandable ?
I propose one repetition to remove any warnings
10
it's mawk, etc. Debian 9.2 is still gawk.
>
> The effective throughput of roughly 1.5 to 2.5 MB/s is still much slower
> than wget's speed report of about 5.5 MB/s.
> I tried with 100 files per run of wget and "jigdo-file make-image".
> No significant differe
when the 10
files are processed.)
The effective throughput of roughly 1.5 to 2.5 MB/s is still much slower
than wget's speed report of about 5.5 MB/s.
I tried with 100 files per run of wget and "jigdo-file make-image".
No significant difference to see. It's all about
0's, so one could play it safe (well, except that it might break with
odd codings) with [a-zA-Z]. posh doesn't seem to know about [:alpha:]
for instance.
posh does know about the ${ # } thing, but that wasn't in Solaris SVR4
shell AFAIK.
> Mine can be justified by S.R.Bourne&#
.Bourne's "The Unix System", i guess,
and it is coordinated with function isURI.
Well, my scruples are mainly about what wget guarantees to use as
local disk path. I understand that jigdo-file would be quite tolerant
as long as the file is somewhere in the "$imageTmp" tre
cdrom:// or ://, in which case
you could dispense with sed and instead do this:
localpath="$imageTmp/${url#[[:alpha:]]*://}"
> - I introduced a dependency on "awk", which was not used in jigdo-lite
> before. The task is to obtain the first word of jigdo-file's ou
Hi,
i Cc: debian-cd with this follow-up to bug 884526 in the hope to get
some review for the endeavor to detect damaged downloaded package files
during a run of jigdo-lite.
Some disputable aspects remain (plus a possible bug in current jigdo-lite,
which will vanish by my proposal). I put them
Hi,
Philip Hands wrote:
> There are four jigdo files that were also corrupt:
Google finds me candidates at ftp.riken.go.jp
but also the ones at cdimage.debian.org/mirror seem to be good.
What i don't find are the expected MD5s of .jigdo files.
Shouldn't they be in file
ected).
I've got that number down to about 400 now, which is mostly concentrated
in a load of debian-installer related files for versions
20150422+deb8u4+b1 and 20150422+deb8u4+b3, mostly armel and armhf. I
suspect that nobody will ever care about those.
There are four jigdo files that were
I just wanted to let someone know of my frustration.
It took me 9 hours to download Stretch DVD-4 from jigdo.
That same download took me 30 minutes from the official repo.
..
If this is 23:05:19+8000 today, then again a file on us.cdimage.debian.org
went bad. We had this only a few days ago, when at least 12 did not match
the expected MD5s.
us.cdimage.debian.org is the fallback server for debian-6.0.5-amd64-DVD-1.jigdo
Normally it provides what other servers don'
Hello Dear
when i use jigdo to download old version debian i got this problem.
I don't know how to fix it.I tried a lot of times.
i had try different server(china,japan,usa,taiwan) and different computer
but i got the same result.
Can you help me to solve it?
Thank you.
Last-modified h
I'm the OP so here's a follow-up.
The archive repairs are what solved my actual problem. Following them
I was able to successfully download Squeeze DVD 1 and move the image
around for package extraction. The jigdo issues were not my difficulty.
The actual point of using this ancie
Hi,
not graftable into debian-6.0.7-amd64-DVD-2 :
extremetuxracer-data_0.4-4_all.deb
openclipart-png_0.18+dfsg-10_all.deb
ko.tex-extra-hlfont_0.1.0-1_all.deb
lilypond-doc_2.12.3-7_all.deb
libboost1.42-doc_1.42.0-4_all.deb
I used
http://us.cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/snapshot/Debian/
a
Hi,
after some pondering:
Can it be that these five packages are damaged too on us.cdimage.debian.org ?
gnome-user-share_2.30.1-1_amd64.deb
ipolish_20100612-1_amd64.deb
myspell-en-gb_3.2.1-2_all.deb
debian-keyring_2010.12.29_all.deb
openoffice.org-l10n-en-gb_3.2.1-11+squeeze8_all.deb
Hi,
Philip Hands wrote:
> Ah, right -- you seem to have discovered some corrupt files on my
> server. Thanks :-)
I had a similar suspicion but failed yet to write a reverse function to
decode the MD5s in the .jigdo file. It's a 6-bit format but not base64.
An encoder is in libj
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
...
> It seems not to be about a missing package of the desired name but about
> something else.
Ah, right -- you seem to have discovered some corrupt files on my
server. Thanks :-)
The gnupg file differs from that on snapshot.debian.org by 12 bytes,
w
an-9.3.0-i386-DVD-1.iso
> without any retrying.
This matches the comments on debian-user. jigdo-lite as program seems
to be ok. But the package mirrors, or the template file, or the jigdo file
of debian-6.0.7-amd64-DVD-1.jigdo have a problem.
The fact that different mirrors yield different counts
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017, Philip Hands wrote:
> Is this the file you're looking for?
>
>
> http://non-us.cdimage.debian.org/snapshot/pool/main/g/gnupg/gnupg-udeb_1.4.10-4+squeeze1_amd64.udeb
Actually, I note that the jigdo file ends with:
[Servers]
Debian=http://us.cdimage.d
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on occasion of a discussion at debian-user i tried to reproduce the
> jigdo-lite problem reported by Nicholas Geovanis in
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/12/msg00467.html
Well done :-)
...
> Further runs wi
On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 08:26:09 +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> on occasion of a discussion at debian-user i tried to reproduce the
> jigdo-lite problem reported by Nicholas Geovanis in
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/12/msg00467.html
>
> My attempt yields better resul
Hi,
on occasion of a discussion at debian-user i tried to reproduce the
jigdo-lite problem reported by Nicholas Geovanis in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/12/msg00467.html
My attempt yields better results than for him.
Nevertheless using
http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/archive
Hi,
in
https://www.debian.org/CD/jigdo-cd/
the "How to download an image with jigdo" paragraph sends potential
downloaders to http://atterer.org/jigdo/ which then has a semi-obvious
link to
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=jigdo-file
How about giving a tangible example
Hi Steve,
On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 at 16:10:47 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 04:54:15PM +0300, Алексей Камышов wrote:
>HI!
>Why not make jigdo files for testing Debian from 01.07.2017 (https://
>cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/*/jigdo-dvd*/)?
Thanks for
HI!
Why not make jigdo files for testing Debian from 01.07.2017
(https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/*/jigdo-dvd*/)?
Best regards,
Aleksey.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 04:54:15PM +0300, Алексей Камышов wrote:
>HI!
>
>Why not make jigdo files for testing Debian from 01.07.2017 (https://
>cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/*/jigdo-dvd*/)?
Thanks for reporting. There was a problem in the config on the build
machine that
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 07:20:38PM +, David -- --- wrote:
>Hi Steve,
>
>Thanks for your help.
>
>I checked the md5sum of that file and it matched the one included in
>the jigdo file but, for some reason, it did not work yet, so I
>removed all temporary files to start fro
1 - 100 of 1532 matches
Mail list logo
