Attention Suse download maintainers:
I have been downloading the 11.2 live cd all weekend (32 bit version) - and every time I’ve gotten a bad checksum. Also, the md5 hash link shows an md5 sum from the wrong file - i586, when the download is i686.
So, I’m confused as to whether I have a good image or not. I’m still saying “not”, until I get good checksums. I’ve repeated the download at least a half-dozen times, fwiw, every time using metalink.
Cheers;
spokesinger
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:56:02 +0000, spokesinger wrote:
> So, I’m confused as to whether I have a good image or not. I’m still
> saying “not”, until I get good checksums. I’ve repeated the download at
> least a half-dozen times, fwiw, every time using metalink.
Which liveCD image are you downloading - GNOME or KDE?
Do you get a checksum error if you use a download link other than the
metalink link?
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Moderator
Gnome image. Haven’t tried anything other than the metalink. Will do tomorrow AM.
S
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:36:01 +0000, spokesinger wrote:
> Gnome image. Haven’t tried anything other than the metalink. Will do
> tomorrow AM.
OK, I can tell you the checksum on the one I have tomorrow as well (it’s
in the office and I’m not). You might also try booting the disc and
using the option to validate the media if it’s there on the live media.
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Moderator
Actually, using the cd’s “verify” feature is what first tipped me off. I didn’t check the first download, just burned, ran the cd, using the “verify media” option first. It came up saying it was bad, so I checked the downloaded file, and then began the multiple downloads. I think the 2nd time the sha1 checked out, and the md5 did not. Given that I also found the md5 download link having the wrong file name, I’m wondering if the disk check and the metalink check (which also warned me of an error) use the md5 checksum.
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:36:02 +0000, spokesinger wrote:
> Actually, using the cd’s “verify” feature is what first tipped me off. I
> didn’t check the first download, just burned, ran the cd, using the
> “verify media” option first. It came up saying it was bad, so I checked
> the downloaded file, and then began the multiple downloads. I think the
> 2nd time the sha1 checked out, and the md5 did not. Given that I also
> found the md5 download link having the wrong file name, I’m wondering if
> the disk check and the metalink check (which also warned me of an error)
> use the md5 checksum.
The md5sum from the ISO I have is
0e704f64c928d65741389f01b4d598c5
I also have a burned disc with that md5sum that I had used to boot a
system with.
I note that this matches the md5sum that’s listed for openSUSE-11.2-GNOME-
LiveCD-i686.iso - is that the checksum you’re using?
Jim
Jim
–
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Moderator
have a read at
http://en.opensuse.org/Download_Help
and
http://forums.opensuse.org/new-user-how-faq-read-only/424615-new-users-suse-11-2-pre-installation-please-read.html
and
http://forums.opensuse.org/new-user-how-faq-read-only/424611-new-users-opensuse-pre-install-general-please-read.html
somewhere in one (or all) of those you will find tips on how to
download and test your iso, and fix it if it is broken (like use a
torrent, it automatically checks and patches until it is
perfect!)…and and and…
oh, and if you are downloading on a windows machine, there is
something flaky about their fat file system that has to be overcome
somehow…i don’t know much about windows so i can’t help you with
that…but, anyway i think even that is covered somewhere in one (or
all of) those three cites…read them, the time you spend there will
save LOTs of time…
–
palladium
These are the MD5sums to test an iso via “md5sum -c <checksumfile>” :
# bfb98c4b2e079f9d147b53d3fc9495c5 openSUSE-11.2-NET-i586.iso
# fcffc8422f56b664559f7fa16d1720ee openSUSE-11.2-NET-x86_64.iso
0e704f64c928d65741389f01b4d598c5 openSUSE-11.2-GNOME-LiveCD-i686-iso/openSUSE-11.2-GNOME-LiveCD-i686.iso
2799a58bdea320977993208aea275e6d openSUSE-11.2-GNOME-LiveCD-x86_64-iso/openSUSE-11.2-GNOME-LiveCD-x86_64.iso
9313767747ac5dc326a45ab6585bbf45 openSUSE-11.2-KDE4-LiveCD-i686-iso/openSUSE-11.2-KDE4-LiveCD-i686.iso
4dcae07b517c57df23dce802afedf87e openSUSE-11.2-KDE4-LiveCD-x86_64-iso/openSUSE-11.2-KDE4-LiveCD-x86_64.iso
295d713314a30ad017948f0d542c6d92 openSUSE-11.2-DVD-i586-iso/openSUSE-11.2-DVD-i586.iso
6a09295e34dc030319d040f67f4742c6 openSUSE-11.2-DVD-x86_64-iso/openSUSE-11.2-DVD-x86_64.iso
858a6dcbe7627040347558d4478e1ac8 openSUSE-Edu-li-f-e-11.2-1-i686.iso
If you have problems downloading, and don’t have openSUSE with aria2c metalink client (kget seems to like torrent for metalink files), try bit torrent which automagically checks the download.
All the popular torrent clients, have a feature to re-check the downloaded file to.
If you then get media errors try burning at a slower speed, eg) setting 4x on CD-R, or burning image to more reliable DVD-R media which seems less troublesome. If verify works, I’ve never had issues with rpm checksums (signature checks) failing without clear physical damage to the media.
Thanks all - got a good copy this AM. Sha1 and md5 both verified.
I THINK, I’m not sure, that the real issue was an incorrectly linked md5 sum. I recognize I might have clicked the wrong link, but I don’t think I did, and I’m pretty sure I backtracked and checked myself. As I mentioned, it had the wrong file name at some point. However, I’m guessing from some of your responses that some of you may be responsible for the site download page files, so you would know better than I.
Fwiw, I use DownThemAll as a download manager on all my platforms (current setup includes 3 distros of Linux and WinXP on various boxes). In my experience, so far, it does a perfect job. It does work as a metalink client.
End of story, yesterday, when I re-downloaded the linked iso, and the sha1 and md5 sum files, everything worked like a champ. DownThemAll may have had an issue with the Metalink data - but it did warn me of bad checksums. Yesterday I used the direct link, instead. And, all check, all systems go.
I am not over-whelmed with the way the new Download page works, it makes it non-obvious how to get sums, and more error prone. It also coughs up on some browsers, which is IMO bad design, rather than generated a simple fallback page with the mirror brain links.
DownThemAll may have had an issue with the Metalink data - but it did warn me of bad checksums. Yesterday I used the direct link, instead. And, all check, all systems go.
Far more hassle for you than you should have had. The Metalink & torrent links did work and eliminate the error prone manual checksum which most would not bother with.