Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 7:01 AM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: I repeated the rm/rsync again and while the size reported is the exact correct number of bytes, the checksum is again wrong: 2832de308651f77df753b5a5977431c0 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Is there anything other than hardware that could account for this? The drive in the laptop is a WDC WD7500BPVX-22JC3T0 and smartctl tests all report No Errors Logged, so I'm a bit stumped? You can rsync the corrupted file back to the other machine, and compare the files there. I use the following command to compare binary files: $ diff -u (hexdump -C file1) (hexdump -C file2) If the difference is only in a few bits, then it is likely a memory error. If there are whole blocks of 0x00 or 0xFF then it might be a disk error. -- Rodrigo
Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi David, there are many factors that may cause a bad download. If memtest does not fail try some more things. 1. Plug a usb stick or an external drive into your laptop and cd into it. Try to run rsync from there and tell me if md5sum failes again. If it does, I guess it has not to do something with your hard drive. 2. Try to download the file with a different computer. If md5sum failes again, you're likely to have a problem with your internet connection. But I guess you're having issues with RAM, hard drive or your file system. Check on this things too. Am 21. Februar 2015 07:01:14 MEZ, schrieb David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com: On 02/19/2015 04:32 PM, Marcel Kleinfeller wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 [marcel@oompf ~]$ md5sum archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Everything should be fine with this mirror. Marcel, All, I am now thoroughly confused regarding why I am not getting the correct checksum when I download to my laptop. Is there any reason one can think of (other than a failing drive -- i.e. disk geometry, etc...) that would cause the reporting of an incorrect checksum? The reason I ask is on my first download from www.gtlib.gatech.edu I received a checksum of: 31fa61afd67cbd88c91f97d7d04244a1 I then downloaded the ISO from mirrors.gigenet.com to my server and received the correct checksum: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso To correct the copy on my laptop, I then deleted the original download and rsync'ed the good copy from my server (via wifi): rsync -uav nirvana:~/arch/iso/archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso . Strangely, the checksum is still not correct: 723f6bab8b950ef59a689ff90a5ec82d archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso I repeated the rm/rsync again and while the size reported is the exact correct number of bytes, the checksum is again wrong: 2832de308651f77df753b5a5977431c0 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Is there anything other than hardware that could account for this? The drive in the laptop is a WDC WD7500BPVX-22JC3T0 and smartctl tests all report No Errors Logged, so I'm a bit stumped? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQJCBAEBCgAsJRxNYXJjZWwgS2xlaW5mZWxsZXIgPG1hcmNlbEBvb21wZi5kZT4F AlToT0IACgkQsuz8uveDUMqiDQ/+Nie5HjFc6TWwwGQl2kUiZVufqPt9m0BsjZPq 2tVN/jibs2metOeXeOv2FjBtcvXfXQ345P5r5xjGdoj7UcwQ/Fpimgdv2yT360hw woSIE939vvLAsRgI2VOXDbXQmvV+vn2QPL0HfdAzAgLsOGMZJYd3tATsI4Kshsck yrg1uz7EHe1UDXYCYcX2llzOfcHMBlu1WPh87VpQNi13KAr+Gk+QOuFdzsA+B9q0 0C7lvaTXamtvyIxTZsYiq+GgjaabIsj1WIvEoonlEraAmCso3ZDmH7x2uQLojSwL +eHvncGtnTeppYUgI0MG0TCoXphNFLkU446OOzbkGHGaWlCTO2J0nOJaRH9UN82q J6Pzd0bGAEDA9m943+tI52yNyOKusnZJHld21HV/aFuRumsg9ry9n14rvUBNlJSG 7H8uEEDrJr0DfLilC7KjyVFJZno7COO7bldS9PWHcOPsfyp+9UxQyCXg88APCStE +RKBznN+RsZKgn/iWNuW3unu02orsVUSPEDNmTH2cbuR3G6YCyKyl4/sVl9vl3iC hUIJoXPB5SO0KEJJDSKtVe+vV6BWkvZOiDHi03p8OhJv7YINsSOpcNmi2TaVxBxc Y97Yp3tBjIvwD+4xxQCVovGHs/sZgsdAxoPXWtsxtdjdr4BuBpCPxBx8/FVBxnVV qnk5xDo= =gebi -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
On 02/19/2015 04:32 PM, Marcel Kleinfeller wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 [marcel@oompf ~]$ md5sum archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Everything should be fine with this mirror. Marcel, All, I am now thoroughly confused regarding why I am not getting the correct checksum when I download to my laptop. Is there any reason one can think of (other than a failing drive -- i.e. disk geometry, etc...) that would cause the reporting of an incorrect checksum? The reason I ask is on my first download from www.gtlib.gatech.edu I received a checksum of: 31fa61afd67cbd88c91f97d7d04244a1 I then downloaded the ISO from mirrors.gigenet.com to my server and received the correct checksum: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso To correct the copy on my laptop, I then deleted the original download and rsync'ed the good copy from my server (via wifi): rsync -uav nirvana:~/arch/iso/archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso . Strangely, the checksum is still not correct: 723f6bab8b950ef59a689ff90a5ec82d archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso I repeated the rm/rsync again and while the size reported is the exact correct number of bytes, the checksum is again wrong: 2832de308651f77df753b5a5977431c0 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Is there anything other than hardware that could account for this? The drive in the laptop is a WDC WD7500BPVX-22JC3T0 and smartctl tests all report No Errors Logged, so I'm a bit stumped? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
David C. Rankin wrote: Is there anything other than hardware that could account for this? The drive in the laptop is [etc.] Bad RAM is a common source of data corruption along those lines. Try booting a memtest disc? --- Drake Wilson
[arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
All, http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/archlinux/iso/2015.02.01/md5sums.txt reports: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Actual download reports: 31fa61afd67cbd88c91f97d7d04244a1 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Will try download again, but can anyone confirm correct md5sum? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
On Feb 19, 2015 1:51 PM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: All, http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/archlinux/iso/2015.02.01/md5sums.txt reports: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Actual download reports: 31fa61afd67cbd88c91f97d7d04244a1 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Will try download again, but can anyone confirm correct md5sum? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Looks like a bad download. I get the correct sum for that ISO. Best, Jesse
Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
On 02/19/2015 03:00 PM, Jesse B. Rodriguez wrote: On Feb 19, 2015 1:51 PM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: All, http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/archlinux/iso/2015.02.01/md5sums.txt reports: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Actual download reports: 31fa61afd67cbd88c91f97d7d04244a1 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Will try download again, but can anyone confirm correct md5sum? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Looks like a bad download. I get the correct sum for that ISO. Best, Jesse md5sum confirmed, after second download from another mirror: http://mirrors.gigenet.com/archlinux/iso/2015.02.01/archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso I get the correct md5sum: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso The other alternative is that there is a bad copy of the ISO on www.gtlib.gatech.edu. I've only had a couple of mismatches in nearly 2 decades of downloads and each time it has either been a bad md5sum listed on the server or a bad copy of the ISO. Maybe this time is my first real bad download. Whoever has access to www.gtlib.gatech.edu may want to run a md5sum/shasum against the copy of the ISO there -- just in case... The md5sum listed is obviously correct as it is confirmed with the ISO download from mirrors.gigenet.com, but I haven't confirmed where it was an initial problem with the download or a problem with the ISO on www.gtlib.gatech.edu. Both downloads show the exact same size: 616562688 bytes. Thanks for your confirmation Jesse. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] Bad md5sum or bad download for archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 [marcel@oompf ~]$ md5sum archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Everything should be fine with this mirror. Am 19. Februar 2015 22:54:45 MEZ, schrieb David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com: On 02/19/2015 03:00 PM, Jesse B. Rodriguez wrote: On Feb 19, 2015 1:51 PM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: All, http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/archlinux/iso/2015.02.01/md5sums.txt reports: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Actual download reports: 31fa61afd67cbd88c91f97d7d04244a1 archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso Will try download again, but can anyone confirm correct md5sum? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Looks like a bad download. I get the correct sum for that ISO. Best, Jesse md5sum confirmed, after second download from another mirror: http://mirrors.gigenet.com/archlinux/iso/2015.02.01/archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso I get the correct md5sum: 3d6a54886230649a049a9d431e03bbba archlinux-2015.02.01-dual.iso The other alternative is that there is a bad copy of the ISO on www.gtlib.gatech.edu. I've only had a couple of mismatches in nearly 2 decades of downloads and each time it has either been a bad md5sum listed on the server or a bad copy of the ISO. Maybe this time is my first real bad download. Whoever has access to www.gtlib.gatech.edu may want to run a md5sum/shasum against the copy of the ISO there -- just in case... The md5sum listed is obviously correct as it is confirmed with the ISO download from mirrors.gigenet.com, but I haven't confirmed where it was an initial problem with the download or a problem with the ISO on www.gtlib.gatech.edu. Both downloads show the exact same size: 616562688 bytes. Thanks for your confirmation Jesse. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQJCBAEBCgAsJRxNYXJjZWwgS2xlaW5mZWxsZXIgPG1hcmNlbEBvb21wZi5kZT4F AlTmZJkACgkQsuz8uveDUMoLOg//Q87EYc0WITwxPrdc6bmM/e3rHXG9+HBzy/aT 8j3sRWYtFMe8FpCPIZsPMZ91JSwd47R0tEVdrXaIDgzWLBXohNmb/vCa6FaTW52f cJ21+3pjk26hS074P8XxyYTmuzP+Pyy8m5xkaeRJju/9fEPY44BK/H7XWyXQpfMu NP2uy1/2u3kk/JiW2kiht0E/z/utKFuy5JAORB/tPT6Wz77VFOHZhxuN/KS3BR8W 8g1gIORRSifDdVp4b9W2EgHThPz9G4lLbuYe3WWGyltX2EPWVhHXrM+/2r6wwInN +DxNllgf6vdeE00CG4wJRt92L8FZKkmMJtFbo393zIaHwiiMx3A9yWNuHKOfd6ju +B4Hkw9kOvwkhQtuUyaGUxmfxMw4RK7vAv7Pjs9Uwpb+gNsxE+7Scn4Glul3uCGB 2XwpJEajVAZSF6BY52DGZdEpiLkKYvDDwM0K1L7jzzSOcdYRUKV8n6zCHzQTJrkg 4TrJEn+cK83vk7BYTQV+wGGEjlLAC/f3/OXyqqdO6l1v55yN/ilFOjDkJwBhsdDs RSk0ogPXV0RtTtZO1Fa7WQbsoA3KS8A9ch6D60N6T+jkJ1Yjj2LTgLZ61XPKSiZI pqwDzD+3DfeYealyC9aNhuqdiJPfU44jH2Amwr+l1jIKKXYINv6HPmO/JfG6yrKn nlLVqrM= =U0Vt -END PGP SIGNATURE-
