> On Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:49:57 -0600 (CST)
WONG YEUNG YAN writes:
WYY> Pls see below:
On some Linux,
$ md5sum --version
md5sum (GNU textutils) 2.0e
$ cd /mnt/cdrom/
$ md5sum -c md5sum.txt | grep automake
./dists/potato/main/binary-i386/devel/automake_1.4-8.deb: OK
./dists/po
On Sun, 11 Mar 2001, Susumu Takuwa wrote:
> First, at where have you got the ISO file?
ftp://ftp.hk.debian.org/debian-cd/2.2_rev2/i386
> If you see some symlink of package on windows, you will get
> that information.
I see.
> Please tell me a package name that md5sum
> is incorrect, of course
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2001 08:35:55 -0500
WONG YEUNG YAN writes:
WYY> I want to make Debian 2.2r2 i386 Official CD and I've download
WYY> binary-i386-1_NONUS.iso and the md5sum is correct.
First, at where have you got the ISO file?
http://cdimage.debian.org/
WYY> But I found that a lots o
Dear all,
I want to make Debian 2.2r2 i386 Official CD and I've download
binary-i386-1_NONUS.iso and the md5sum is correct.
I burnt this image to CD-R using HP 8230e CD writer and
Easy CD creator 5, no error was reported.
But I found that a lots of packages/files in this CD are actually
files w
Apologize for the cross post, but I figured there would be someone
on these lists that can answer this one
Is the Debian/68K tree included on ANY CD set that claims to be an
"Official Debian CD" distribution, regardless of source?
I'm particularly interested in staying with the 2.0.xx series
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens)
> ...
> We will do this by producing a CD "master" (actually an ISO image file)
> of each release ...
Excellent! (The quality of the CD distribution depends only on Debian, not
on CD manufacturers.)
Daniel
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-
DEBIAN CD POLICY CHANGES
Recently we have been working on some changes to the Debian CD policy.
There's been a good deal of misunderstanding about those changes, so
please let me take this opportunity to set it straight.
A number of users have complained that the only way th
7 matches
Mail list logo
