Official testing Debian DVD images errors and ommissions
Hello there to the Debian CD team.
My name is Nick Barkas and I am sending this email as there are silly
mistakes in the official
testing Debian DVD (iso-jigdo) web pages.
First of all, in the .iso web pages in
"http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/i386/iso-dvd/"; there
is no md5sum file included!!!!!!!
What will happen if a poor man's 8.6GB .iso's get corrupted?
He will probably either send you an email insulting you or he will not
try official testing debian again,as his newly written dvd's will be
worthless.
PLEASE POST AN "MD5SUMS" FILE IMMEDIATELY IN
"http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/i386/iso-dvd/";!!!
Some guys (like me), are kind enough to use jigdo (with has md5sum
inside),in order to save Debian some bandwidth.
I downloaded the 3 .jigdo files and wrote the md5sums in a text file
and then I downloaded the smallest .iso
(http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/i386/iso-dvd/debian-testing-i386-binary-3.iso)
in order to md5sum it to see if the md5sum from the .jigdo
(http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/i386/jigdo-dvd/debian-testing-i386-binary-3.jigdo)
and the .iso (from the web page) md5sum were the same.TO MY SURPRISE
THE MD5SUMS WERE NOT THE SAME!!!.THE .ISO IMAGE WAS O.K.,AS I IT WAS
DOWNLOADED WITH A DSL LINE WITH EVERY POSSIBLE PRECAUTION (NOTHING
ELSE BEING DOWNLOADED AT THE SAME TIME, NOT EVEN A 1KB FILE AND NO ONE
USING THE MACHINE FOR ANYTHING ELSE).
I HAVE DOWNLOADED HUNDREDS OF .ISO's THIS WAY AND NOT ONE WAS EVER
CORRUPTED.HERE ARE THE SUMS (MD5):
f96e0d1d90ebea07105e039c1b34eedc debian-testing-i386-binary-3.iso (TRUE .iso)
c3a11951ba773adadeb1cd6ed9060ec2 debian-testing-i386-binary-3.iso
(JIGDO .iso [# Template Hex MD5sum c3a11951ba773adadeb1cd6ed9060ec2])
THE .ISO's from the http web server WERE CREATED ON 19 January ,WHILE
THE JIGDO .ISO's WERE CREATED ON 18 January.THIS IS CRAP,IT IS NOT
LOGICAL TO HAVE
THE .JIGDO's A DAY EARLIER THAN THE .ISO's, AS JIGDO NEEDS SOME EXTRA
WORK.IF THESE ARE DIFFERENT VERSIONS WITH MINOR DIFFERENCES,THEN MARK
THEM AS DIFFERENT WITH AN APPROPRIATE NUMBER SUCH AS
"debian-testing-i386-binary-3.01.iso" OR BETTER
"debian-testing-i386-binary-3-19012006.iso", FOR THE ISO's THAT CAME
ONE DAY LATER.YOU COULD POST THE FUCKING JIGDOS ONE FUCKING DAY
LATER.THAT WAY YOU WOULD NOT MAKE SUCH A MESS, FORCING PEOPLE TO
EITHER DOWNLOAD THE WHOLE ISOS OR DOWNLOAD THE OUTDATED(?) (OR
DIFFERENT-CORRUPTED) JIGDO ISO's.
SHAME ON THE DEBIAN CD TEAM TO MAKE SUCH MISTAKES.IF YOU WANT PEOPLE
TO DOWNLOAD .ISO's WITH JIGDO AT LEAST MAKE SURE THAT THE .ISO's IN
HTTP AND IN JIGDO ARE IDENTICAL.IF THESE THREE IMAGE SETS WHERE
INTENTED TO BE IDENTICAL, BUT ONE OF THESE IS CORRUPTED, SOME PEOPLE
SHOULD BE THROWN OUT OF THE DEBIAN CD PROJECT, AS THE PAY NO ATTENTION
TO THE IMPORTANT AND CRITICAL TASK THEY WERE GIVEN.
This thing does not occur on the stable (3.1r1) iso-jigdo dvd images.
Please provide new jigdos (based on the 19 January .iso files) in
"http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/i386/jigdo-dvd/".For
now,I am forced to download the first two dvd .iso files from your
HTTP in Sweden and make an md5sum file (HOPING THAT NO CORRUPTION
SHALL OCCUR).
Reply to: