Re: etch-proposed-updates amd64 Release file fails checksum [Was: possible problem with ftp.us.debian.org]

2007-06-02 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 04:57:46PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: More than a month ago I filed a bug report http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=418956 Sorry about that, fixed now. (The daily regeneration of the Release files wasn't working because the dak script wasn't noticing

etch-proposed-updates amd64 Release file fails checksum [Was: possible problem with ftp.us.debian.org]

2007-05-27 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
Dear Developers, I found a problem with our package repository for amd64 in etch-proposed-updates. More than a month ago I filed a bug report http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=418956 which was merged with another one later on http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=419505

Re: etch-proposed-updates amd64 Release file fails checksum [Was: possible problem with ftp.us.debian.org]

2007-05-27 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 04:57:46PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: IIRC amd64 is the 2nd most popular architecture, and most of the people use proposed-updates, This last is simply not true. Although it's now significantly /safer/ to use proposed-updates than it was in the past, because now

Re: etch-proposed-updates amd64 Release file fails checksum [Was: possible problem with ftp.us.debian.org]

2007-05-27 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
ok - point is taken and a workaround is to don't use proposed-updates at all (which I have to do for the last months anyways). It remains strange though why amd64 is so unfortunate to have this bug of broken 'official' part of Debian repository. On Sun, 27 May 2007, Steve Langasek wrote: IIRC