what are those SHA1 values in the CHECKSUM files for the beta DVDs?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  they don't look like normal 160-bit SHA1 values.

rday
--

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
    Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca                          Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
========================================================================

[Miloslav Trmač]

Robert P. J. Day píše v Út 31. 03. 2009 v 18:01 -0400:
>  they don't look like normal 160-bit SHA1 values. 
They are
SHA-256, not SHA-1.  Use sha256sum like you would use sha1sum.
	Mirek

[Jesse Keating]

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 18:01 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>    they don't look like normal 160-bit SHA1 values. 
The file headers are misleading.  The gpg signature used is a sha1 size,
but the checksum of the files themselves are actually sha256.  Next time
we gpg sign checksum files we'll be sure to use a sha256 gpg signature.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

[Robert G. (Doc) Savage]

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 15:19 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>  On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 18:01 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>  >   they don't look like normal 160-bit SHA1 values.
>  
>  The file headers are misleading.  The gpg signature used is a sha1 size,
>  but the checksum of the files themselves are actually sha256.  Next time
>  we gpg sign checksum files we'll be sure to use a sha256 gpg signature. 
The hash sizes are correct for SHA256, but the values I compute for the
source ISO images using sha256sum under RHEL5 are all different from
those in Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM. How did that happen??

--Doc Savage
  Fairview Heights, IL

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 21:21 -0500, Robert G. (Doc) Savage wrote:
>  
>  The hash sizes are correct for SHA256, but the values I compute for the
>  source ISO images using sha256sum under RHEL5 are all different from
>  those in Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM. How did that happen?? 
Which ones?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

[Robert G. (Doc) Savage]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 19:49 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>  On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 21:21 -0500, Robert G. (Doc) Savage wrote:
>  > 
>  > The hash sizes are correct for SHA256, but the values I compute for the
>  > source ISO images using sha256sum under RHEL5 are all different from
>  > those in Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM. How did that happen??
>  
>  Which ones? 
All of them. Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM contains:

d6ff0e7378477cbce4f3296cbc01d1e8a2126d2af5939a56b85e0e6a49d3a906
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-DVD.iso
433654b6d7673422288f6b5bf36437503c172e2754d5f3d24106a2ae5ce15cbe
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc1.iso
35bdbca64f40badafa19d28b88b4f55ad13a226274c13dce966d1aea7f3418f1
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc2.iso
1c3a0db0715d185bfe5d92f4b190307f3d08834f882f8c54e70f9919e338eb23
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc3.iso
49fa06c6c36205cfa4fcdd1a24a4e947a7f29da5ae912f6ff06d845a27ad6733
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc4.iso
fad557963488c337b92397db4dfaaca37998347887b5662ab2bb86f2695a7327
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc5.iso
2e8f2b60bca3861e048604000c9c2f93e11eb920a23e248ea80242fe927efed7
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc6.iso
55b49dd03b2a2aef089f4676def3d5cb4e651cc2062a988f4e433563f7faf772
*Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc7.iso

Running 'sha256sum *.iso' produces:

9c56599f0b8d14f7eb81791f8b2f20bed746c13216f6e4d613cd74f64ed319af 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-DVD.iso
eb54824e28919096ff54a2ddd2e46a6c8b9daa44bbaf649020eba5e623de1afa 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc1.iso
335039d4858bfb162aef6130e76228a348d4f32ab324e875c85afc3c031269fb 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc2.iso
315825a146e3d2d83711602de4635bab04fe2a5e06c2e06ead44234bd80ce8da 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc3.iso
1feb9900c623d4926fe107a1f9403179f4305d776e376cf410c983adec6f3cbe 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc4.iso
31a8492013725a445ef05c68ed7b2115430cce65d41a026b0ecd27bddcf32bad 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc5.iso
8c56db1e85a84bf45a5fbd0a71ce7f355192873ca23ff4bcd3c60e2fc927431d 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc6.iso
009f82540d64ed80e0d33aa629c17d4bb1200f7175eef9d2f4517b13d813a92f 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc7.iso

$ sha256sum -c Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM 
Fedora-11-Beta-source-DVD.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc1.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc2.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc3.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc4.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc5.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc6.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc7.iso: FAILED
sha256sum: WARNING: 8 of 8 computed checksums did NOT match

???????

--Doc Savage
  Fairview Heights, IL

[Robert G. (Doc) Savage]

>  On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 22:08 -0500, Robert G. (Doc) Savage wrote:
> > All of them. Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM contains:
>
>  Did you get these from Torrent, or from a mirror?
>
>  --
>  Jesse Keating
>  Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
>  identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
>  -- 
Jesse,

I rsync'd the F11b source isos from the Georgia Tech mirror. Their
..CHECKSUM file is identical to the one at download.fedora.redhat.com. I
also rsync'd all of the F11b x86_64 isos from GT and those sha256sums are
fine. If you can run sha256sum on Red Hat's site, do the source isos there
match their ..CHECKSUM? Is it possible that the source isos were updated
after ..CHECKSUM was created? It's a puzzlement.

--Doc Savage
  Fairview Heights, IL

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 22:08 -0500, Robert G. (Doc) Savage wrote:
>  All of them. Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM contains: 
Did you get these from Torrent, or from a mirror?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, dsavage(a)peaknet.net <dsavage(a)peaknet.net&gt; said:
>  I rsync'd the F11b source isos from the Georgia Tech mirror.
> Their
>  ..CHECKSUM file is identical to the one at download.fedora.redhat.com. I
>  also rsync'd all of the F11b x86_64 isos from GT and those sha256sums are
>  fine. If you can run sha256sum on Red Hat's site, do the source isos there
>  match their ..CHECKSUM? Is it possible that the source isos were updated
>  after ..CHECKSUM was created? It's a puzzlement. 
I just checked the sums on mirror.hiwaay.net directly for the 11-Beta
source ISOs, and they all failed:

$ sha256sum -c Fedora-11-Beta-source-CHECKSUM
Fedora-11-Beta-source-DVD.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc1.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc2.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc3.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc4.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc5.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc6.iso: FAILED
Fedora-11-Beta-source-disc7.iso: FAILED
$ 

I synced directly from the masters, so this does appear to be a problem
with the release spin.
-- 
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net&gt;
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

[Jesse Keating]

On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 13:54 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
>  I synced directly from the masters, so this does appear to be a
> problem
>  with the release spin. 
Looks like an old CHECKSUM file snuck in, and I didn't notice it when I
was checking ( as I checked on the torrent side and the file there is
correct ).  I'll fix this right quick.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

[Robert G. (Doc) Savage]

On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 15:55 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>  On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 13:54 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
>  > I synced directly from the masters, so this does appear to be a problem
>  > with the release spin.
>  
>  Looks like an old CHECKSUM file snuck in, and I didn't notice it when I
>  was checking ( as I checked on the torrent side and the file there is
>  correct ).  I'll fix this right quick. 
Your Apr 3 22:57 CHECKSUM file confirms all the Mar 25 source ISOs I
rsync'd from Georgia Tech. Thanks, Jesse.

--Doc Savage
  Fairview Heights, IL