Archives
Archives
| From: | "Marvin Gülker" <m-guelker@×××××××××××.de> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Wrong SHA512 checksum for 20160630 amd64 minimal installation medium | ||
| Date: | Tue, 05 Jul 2016 11:57:49 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20160705135735.010465ab@hades.cable.internal.west-ik.de | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] Wrong SHA512 checksum for 20160630 amd64 minimal installation medium by Andrew Savchenko |
||
| 1 | Am Tue, 5 Jul 2016 13:26:50 +0300 |
| 2 | schrieb Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>: |
| 3 | |
| 4 | > Checksums are indeed wrong, whirlpool one too. Thanks for noticing, |
| 5 | > I opened a bug for this: |
| 6 | > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=588062 |
| 7 | |
| 8 | Okay, thank you. This has been now marked as a duplicate of another |
| 9 | bug[1], which in turn links to a message on the gentoo-mirrors ML[2] |
| 10 | from about a month ago. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | I am not sure I understand the implications. Are the amd64 images all |
| 13 | corrupt, and thus should not be used for installation? If so, they |
| 14 | should not be linked to on the main download site. If not, can someone |
| 15 | with access to the GPG signing key please publish the correct checksums |
| 16 | signed somewhere so we have an interim workaround? |
| 17 | |
| 18 | > In future please file bugs for similar issues right ahead. |
| 19 | |
| 20 | Noted. |
| 21 | |
| 22 | Greetings |
| 23 | Marvin |
| 24 | |
| 25 | [1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=581638 |
| 26 | [2]: |
| 27 | https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-mirrors/message/a9fbc7213f832e9918784bb8d334628b |
| 28 | |
| 29 | -- |
| 30 | Blog: http://www.guelkerdev.de |
| 31 | PGP/GPG ID: F1D8799FBCC8BC4F |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] Wrong SHA512 checksum for 20160630 amd64 minimal installation medium | Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> |