On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 07:25:09PM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 07:53:32PM +0100, Michael Vogt wrote: > >On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 04:28:42PM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> Hi Michael! [..] > >Having the uncompressed files on the cdrom should not be needed, apt > >should simply fetch the compressed ones if the uncompressed ones are > >missing. It does need the hash of the uncompressed one in the Release > >so that it can verify that it matches after the uncompression. > > OK, cool. I'll admit to being curious - why does it want both > compressed and uncompressed? Is there a worry about corruption, maybe? [..]
Its a bit of a idiosyncrasy of apt. It used to only check the hash after uncompression. Nowdays it checks it at all stages. But indeed, a nice benefit of this is that it also protects against corruption during the uncompression. Cheers, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141031082630.GG4651@bod