Julian Leyh wrote:
> Am 23.01.10 07:05, schrieb James Hartley:
>> A quick search in the misc@ archives& PR database didn't reveal that anyone
>> has mentioned this before.
>>
>> In installing the 20 January (#511) i386 snapshot, I received a SHA256
>> mismatch on base46.tgz. Otherwise, the snapsh
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:05:13PM -0800, James Hartley wrote:
> A quick search in the misc@ archives & PR database didn't reveal that anyone
> has mentioned this before.
>
> In installing the 20 January (#511) i386 snapshot, I received a SHA256
> mismatch on base46.tgz. Otherwise, the snapshot i
Am 23.01.10 07:05, schrieb James Hartley:
A quick search in the misc@ archives& PR database didn't reveal that anyone
has mentioned this before.
In installing the 20 January (#511) i386 snapshot, I received a SHA256
mismatch on base46.tgz. Otherwise, the snapshot installs as expected.
Why ch
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:05:13PM -0800, James Hartley wrote:
> A quick search in the misc@ archives & PR database didn't reveal that anyone
> has mentioned this before.
>
> In installing the 20 January (#511) i386 snapshot, I received a SHA256
> mismatch on base46.tgz. Otherwise, the snapshot i
A quick search in the misc@ archives & PR database didn't reveal that anyone
has mentioned this before.
In installing the 20 January (#511) i386 snapshot, I received a SHA256
mismatch on base46.tgz. Otherwise, the snapshot installs as expected.
FYI & FWIW.
Jim
5 matches
Mail list logo