Incorect MD5 checksums or what a hell ???
Paul Howarth
paul at city-fan.org
Wed Jan 5 13:07:17 UTC 2005
Traian Gheorghe ONCIU wrote:
> What tell me in this mail ?
> As you wrote, for *Fedora CORE-3*, the new tetex is:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Product : Fedora Core 3
> Name : tetex
> Version : 2.0.2
> Release : 21.2
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> and the list of files (i386 version) is:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-afm-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-doc-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-dvips-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-fonts-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-latex-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/tetex-xdvi-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> and the MD5 checksums you wrote:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 5efacdad82d61ed25030269b6c89abfe i386/tetex-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> 49967d06270603a146d9f8d27eaaf08c i386/tetex-afm-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> 7ec42e9568ec05ed17b5ad708286bd0d i386/tetex-doc-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> 14ea742121160307adbbcf37c4a3401a i386/tetex-dvips-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> 569591b26e0cab205c87f112756212c9 i386/tetex-fonts-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> e249065b4ff83339a52cf4ee67b5931d i386/tetex-latex-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> aee5e12bc7c8349ab06f0f3ebe8eab5f i386/tetex-xdvi-2.0.2-21.2.i386.rpm
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Please try to download all these files (only 60 Mb, ???) and you can see
> that ALL CHECKSUMS *ARE WRONG* !!!
>
> So I ask you to send me an answer (new and correct MD5 checksums or when
> you post another RPMs on your site).
There's no need. Yes, the md5sums are wrong but RPM packages have
built-in checksums (and these RPMs also have GPG signatures), which you
can check using "rpm --checksig *.rpm"
Paul.
More information about the users
mailing list