Some good labelling system so we know it is xubuntu-gutsy-alternate rather than ubuntu
Adam Miller
maxamillion at gmail.com
Sat Jun 16 17:42:24 BST 2007
I blame firefox then :)
-Adam
On 6/16/07, vidd <vidd at crosslink.net> wrote:
>
> Adam Miller wrote:
> > Its strange that those two text files yield the same md5sum because i
> > have had many iso images have different md5sum hashes after their
> > names have been changed ... its rather possible it was a fluke ... i
> > will investigate further and if i am wrong, i apologize for
> > distributing false information.
> >
> > -Adam
> >
> > On 6/15/07, *shirish* <shirishag75 at gmail.com
> > <mailto:shirishag75 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > Message: 5
> > > Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:56:33 -0500
> > > From: "Jim Campbell" <jwcampbell at gmail.com
> > <mailto:jwcampbell at gmail.com>>
> > > Subject: Re: Some good labelling system so we know it is
> > > xubuntu-gutsy-alternate rather than ubuntu
> > > To: "Xubuntu Development Discussion"
> > <xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> > <mailto:xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>>
> > > Message-ID:
> > >
> > <cc5454020706142056j65983326g7b77e37696c97ceb at mail.gmail.com
> > <mailto:cc5454020706142056j65983326g7b77e37696c97ceb at mail.gmail.com
> >>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > <snipped>
> >
> > > 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 <mailto:jwcampbell at gmail.com>
> >
> > I would be interested to know if you do find anything if such a
> > discussion took place before for I'm sure they had this same issue
> > when kubuntu was launched or should have been unless they had
> > seperate
> > repositories or some other means of differentiation that we have no
> > idea about. Thanx for reminding me of rsync though :P
> >
> > --
> > Shirish Agarwal
> > This email is licensed under
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
> >
> > 065C 6D79 A68C E7EA 52B3 8D70 950D 53FB 729A 8B17
> >
> > --
> > xubuntu-devel mailing list
> > xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:
> xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AdamMiller
> It is strange....
> I attempted to see if i can mimic the action by making a dummy ISO and
> downloading it to see if whatever makes the (2).iso actually changed the
> data in the .iso . It would appear there is some coding that makes
> duplicate copies NOT overwrite the original, and change the name
> instead. This is NOT typical download behavior....the default is to
> always overwrite, rename, or cancel. What ever is causing the files to
> rename themselves is probably also changing the md5sum.
>
>
>
> --
> xubuntu-devel mailing list
> xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
>
--
http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AdamMiller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20070616/57c6b98c/attachment.htm
More information about the xubuntu-devel
mailing list