md5 of file in 6.10 server does not match

Bug #82878 reported by Dan Henage on 2007-02-02
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Colin Watson

Bug Description

In ubuntu-6.10-server-i386.iso the md5 of the file smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb does not match the md5 listed in /md5sum.txt.

0F1EF97D599722D06F4B3340BBD6793A is the md5 of the file smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb in ubuntu-6.10-server-i386.iso

0F1EF97D599722D06F4B3340BBD6793A is the md5 of the file smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb that I downloaded from to double-check that I had the correct file

a4e2ea782531413f48a242f2e09070a0 is the md5 of the file /pool/main/s/samba/smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deblisted that is listed in /md5sum.txt on ubuntu-6.10-server-i386.iso

P.S. - I checked the md5 of my ISO (ubuntu-6.10-server-i386.iso) and it is correct (cd6c09ff8f9c72a19d0c3dced4b31b3a). These problems are ocurring whether I mount the ISO directly or burn it to a CD.

Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

The official image says:

cjwatson@lithium:~/cdimage/www/simple/edgy$ isoinfo -R -i ubuntu-6.10-server-i386.iso -x /md5sum.txt | grep smbfs
0f1ef97d599722d06f4b3340bbd6793a ./pool/main/s/samba/smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb
cjwatson@lithium:~/cdimage/www/simple/edgy$ isoinfo -R -i ubuntu-6.10-server-i386.iso -x /pool/main/s/samba/smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb | md5sum
0f1ef97d599722d06f4b3340bbd6793a -

(lithium is the master CD image server, and the directory I'm in is the one that gets mirrored to, so there is no possibility of download errors here.)

The md5sum of your ISO image is indeed correct, so I don't know what might be wrong here. Could you please try to figure out what the differences are using e.g. 'diff -a'?

Dan Henage (dhenage+launchpad) wrote :

Colin: this is not a bug after all. My error.

My error was in the way notepad.exe displays line breaks in md5sum.txt and makes it appear that the md5 for swat_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb belongs to smbfs_3.0.22-1ubuntu4_i386.deb. The md5sum I listed above (a4e2ea782531413f48a242f2e09070a0) was actually for that following file.

Thank you for looking into this.

Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

Aha, yes, that would explain it. Thanks for getting back to us.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers