ports/123262: png / md5/ sha checksum failure
Michael Scheidell
scheidell at secnap.net
Wed Apr 30 19:30:06 UTC 2008
The following reply was made to PR ports/123262; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Michael Scheidell <scheidell at secnap.net>
To: Andrey Chernov <ache at nagual.pp.ru>
Cc: bf <bf2006a at yahoo.com>, bug-followup at FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: ports/123262: png / md5/ sha checksum failure
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:22:05 -0400
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070606040104080706070802
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrey Chernov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:32:50AM -0700, bf wrote:
>
>> -the library's homepage also has the larger, newer
>> distfile, although some of the file size descriptions
>> on the webpage have not yet been updated from the
>> earlier numbers;
>>
>> -any difference in the size of the distfile on
>> Sourceforge mirrors is probably due to the fact that
>> they haven't been synch'ed yet.
>>
>
> I check right now and don't notice any file size / MD5 changes stated at
> the homepage, they match distfile. Lets wait for a while and see how they
> syncs later.
>
>
yes, they do match distfile, but follow any of their download links..
its the larger size and different checksums.
here is the explain I got earlier:
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> (note below, libpng says file size for libpng-1.2.27.tar.bz2 with
> scripts should be 641193) heanet has a bigger file.
> other sourceforge.net mirrors have it right.
>
I've pulled the file from the SURFnet and University of Kent mirrors and
the simplesystems.org mirror referenced on the site. All have the same
804821 bytes big file. The tar.gz also doesn't match.
If you have the right and the supposedly wrong version, why not untar
them and diff them to see what the differences are?
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
Main: 561-999-5000, Office: 561-939-7259
> *| *SECNAP Network Security Corporation
Winner 2008 Technosium hot company award.
www.technosium.com/hotcompanies/ <http://www.technosium.com/hotcompanies/>
_____________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(r).
For Information please see http://www.spammertrap.com.
_____________________________________________________________________________
--------------070606040104080706070802
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Andrey Chernov wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20080430191841.GA42769 at nagual.pp.ru" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:32:50AM -0700, bf wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-the library's homepage also has the larger, newer
distfile, although some of the file size descriptions
on the webpage have not yet been updated from the
earlier numbers;
-any difference in the size of the distfile on
Sourceforge mirrors is probably due to the fact that
they haven't been synch'ed yet.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I check right now and don't notice any file size / MD5 changes stated at
the homepage, they match distfile. Lets wait for a while and see how they
syncs later.
</pre>
</blockquote>
yes, they do match distfile, but follow any of their download links..
its the larger size and different checksums.<br>
<br>
here is the explain I got earlier:<br>
<br>
Michael Scheidell wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="font-size: large;">(note below, libpng
says file size for libpng-1.2.27.tar.bz2 with scripts should be
641193) heanet has a bigger file.
<br>
other sourceforge.net mirrors have it right.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
I've pulled the file from the SURFnet and University of Kent mirrors
and the simplesystems.org mirror referenced on the site. All have the
same 804821 bytes big file. The tar.gz also doesn't match.
<br>
<br>
If you have the right and the supposedly wrong version, why not untar
them and diff them to see what the differences are?
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Michael Scheidell, CTO<br>
Main: 561-999-5000, Office: 561-939-7259<br>
<font color="#999999">></font><font color="#cc0000"> <b>| </b></font>SECNAP
Network Security Corporation<br>
Winner 2008 Technosium <font color="#cc0000">hot company</font> award.<br>
<a href="http://www.technosium.com/hotcompanies/">www.technosium.com/hotcompanies/</a><br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div id="disclaimer.secnap.com"><hr>
<p>This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap®.
<br />For Information please see
<a href="\">www.spammertrap.com<br /></a></p>
<hr></div>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------070606040104080706070802--
More information about the freebsd-ports-bugs
mailing list