From: gschmid@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Date: Mon Jul 08 2002 - 14:55:05 EDT
Many thanks to Martin M.@HP & Chris R.
Apparently the cover letter posted at:
<
http://ftp1.support.compaq.com/public/Digital_UNIX/v4.0g/t64v40gas0003-20010613.html
>
has the wrong 'cksum' and MD5 checksums on it and Martin
was kind enough to check with the patch people @ HP
who will look into it.
Chris R. noticed that the 'sum' checksum at:
<
ftp://ftp1.support.compaq.com/public/Digital_UNIX/v4.0g/t64v40gas0003-20010613.CHECKSUM
>
and at:
<
http://ftp1.support.compaq.com/patches/public/unix/v4.0g/t64v40gas0003-20010613.CHKSUM
>
was correct, which matched the value I got.
The three checksums that I get are:
4150122749 81510400 t64v40gas0003-20010613.tar ('cksum' output)
141edf7cdda9a5f2af044397bc27dd60 t64v40gas0003-20010613.tar (MD5)
31738 79600 t64v40gas0003-20010613.tar ('sum' output)
Chris & Martin both confirmed the 'cksum' value above as well.
Original post:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I have checksum'd the aggregate patch kit file for 4.0G
(t64V40gas0003-20010613.tar) and they doesn't match
the ones posted on
<
http://ftp1.support.compaq.com/public/Digital_UNIX/v4.0g/t64v40gas0003-20010613.html
>
(I checked both the 'cksum' and 'md5sum' checksums.)
I then downloaded the file a second time, got the same results
and then tried again on another machine.
I don't really feel comfortable applying a patch kit whose
checksums don't match the ones reported on the web page.
Especially since the web page is a year old; I figure someone
must have reported/fixed this by now.
Who at HP can I get to verify the checksums, and if they're posted
incorrectly, get the web page fixed? The webmaster? Support?
Does anyone else verfiy the checksums after downloading
the patch kits or am I the only paranoid nitpicker out there?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Apr 12 2008 - 10:48:45 EDT