Some good labelling system so we know it is xubuntu-gutsy-alternate rather than ubuntu

Jim Campbell jwcampbell at gmail.com
Fri Jun 15 04:56:33 BST 2007


On 6/14/07, Adam Miller <maxamillion at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> another issue thought of is that when you get multiple .iso images, the
> file name seems to change the md5sum ... so the gutsy-desktop-i386(2).iso
> would have a different md5sum than gutsy-desktop-i386.iso and won't match
> with the one posted on the site
>
> now, i personally only have interest in the xubuntu gutsy image so i
> wouldn't have this problem, but i can see where it might become an issue.
>
> just a thought
>
> -Adam
>
> On 6/14/07, Freddy Martinez <freddymartinez9 at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >
> > We would do it by date. xubuntu-gutsy-20070615 would be a daily.
>
>
I don't think that adding the dates would be the way to go just because some
people use rsync to update their images to the latest version.  It saves
them download time, and also saves some bandwidth.  The rsync-updating
approach wouldn't work if there were different time-stamped file names for
each new image.

Also, if someone needs to verify the date of their image for some reason,
they could just check the md5sum.  I think there's even a date-related file
included in the ISO image somewhere, but I don't recall what it is off-hand.

I'll bring this iso-filename matter up to the team that builds the images
soon.  I'll try to see if there's been any discussion on this elsewhere
first, though.  I have to imagine that it's come up before...  Maybe there's
a reason for it being the way it is.

Jim
-- 
jwcampbell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20070614/ec26fe5b/attachment.htm 


More information about the xubuntu-devel mailing list