Leap 15.4 offline image fails check
sha256sum -c openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso.sha256 sha256sum: openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso: No such file or
After downloading the ISO and sha256sum files, I checked the integrity, but it failed. directory openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso: FAILED open or read sha256sum: WARNING: 1 listed file could not be read I then copied the ISO to a USB stick, using SUSE Studio Imagewriter and booted the image to do media check, but it failed.
James Knott wrote:
After downloading the ISO and sha256sum files, I checked the integrity, but it failed.
sha256sum -c openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso.sha256 sha256sum: openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso: No such file or directory openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso: FAILED open or read sha256sum: WARNING: 1 listed file could not be read
Well, do you actually have that file, "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso" The checksum matches, by the way. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.6°C)
On 2022-06-08 10:00 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
Well, do you actually have that file, "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso"
The checksum matches, by the way.
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file.
James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 10:00 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
Well, do you actually have that file, "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso"
The checksum matches, by the way.
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file.
Yes, openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.3°C)
On 2022-06-08 10:12 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file. Yes,
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file.
Here is the link that I download from. https://get.opensuse.org/leap/15.4/#download I'm using the Firefox browser to download the ISO. The network image is also providing the wrong file.
James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 10:12 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file. Yes,
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file.
Here is the link that I download from.
https://get.opensuse.org/leap/15.4/#download
I'm using the Firefox browser to download the ISO. The network image is also providing the wrong file.
Yeah, I think there is something wrong, I have opened a ticket. https://progress.opensuse.org/issues/112208 -- Per Jessen, Zürich (17.4°C)
On 2022-06-08 08:16, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 10:12 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file. Yes,
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file.
Here is the link that I download from.
https://get.opensuse.org/leap/15.4/#download
I'm using the Firefox browser to download the ISO. The network image is also providing the wrong file.
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
On 08.06.2022 18:15, Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 08:16, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 10:12 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file. Yes,
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file.
Here is the link that I download from.
https://get.opensuse.org/leap/15.4/#download
I'm using the Firefox browser to download the ISO. The network image is also providing the wrong file.
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
a) there are a lot of images there and so "the correct" is rather vague. Which one is "the correct image"? b) what you get depends on a program you use to download image as was already mentioned. Today Chromium will save openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Current.iso and openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso as openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso. I am lazy to test Firefox. curl derives name from the given URL ignoring redirections. wget does the same by default but could be told to use redirected URL. Finally I am surprised this is presented as the new problem. This is the same with Leap 15.3 and likely previous versions, and it is the same for Tumbleweed. It was discussed and I believe it was reported. As result obviously depends on end-user environment, I am not sure how it can be fixed (without requiring web page update every time new build is published).
On 2022-06-08 09:44, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
a) there are a lot of images there and so "the correct" is rather vague. Which one is "the correct image"?
As I noted in my reply to Freek, when downloading from the repo itself, all you need concern yourself with is getting the correct files for your architecture.
On 2022-06-08 12:18 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 09:44, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK. a) there are a lot of images there and so "the correct" is rather vague. Which one is "the correct image"? As I noted in my reply to Freek, when downloading from the repo itself, all you need concern yourself with is getting the correct files for your architecture.
I downloaded the current ISO and, after renaming it, it passed the sha256sum check. However, after copying to the USB stick, it's not bootable. The stick is read, as indicated by the flashing LED, but then it falls through to the grub menu for 15.3. I have been running openSUSE and SUSE before it for around 20 years and never had such problems installing it.
James Knott composed on 2022-06-08 12:38 (UTC-0400):
it falls through to the grub menu for 15.3. I have been running openSUSE and SUSE before it for around 20 years and never had such problems installing it.
I was attracted to SuSE in the first place by the option to install it from the internet (for free, before it became FOSS). This is how I've done most installs. I started out by downloading and burning the NET .iso, but I don't often do that any more. Instead, I download the installation linux and initrd and load them with Grub, no fiddling with discs or sticks, except with a PC with no Grub already on it anywhere. https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Linuxrc has installation options, which I use to pre-configure network, hostname and various other parameters for installation and/or the installed system. Also, I avoid .iso downloading issues by using a dedicated downloader rather than a web browser, usually wget. I've never had a wget downloaded .iso fail verification. Thus I rarely bother to try to verify any more. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata
On 2022-06-08 12:53 p.m., Felix Miata wrote:
James Knott composed on 2022-06-08 12:38 (UTC-0400):
it falls through to the grub menu for 15.3. I have been running openSUSE and SUSE before it for around 20 years and never had such problems installing it. I was attracted to SuSE in the first place by the option to install it from the internet (for free, before it became FOSS). This is how I've done most installs. I started out by downloading and burning the NET .iso, but I don't often do that any more. Instead, I download the installation linux and initrd and load them with Grub, no fiddling with discs or sticks, except with a PC with no Grub already on it anywhere.
https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Linuxrc has installation options, which I use to pre-configure network, hostname and various other parameters for installation and/or the installed system.
Also, I avoid .iso downloading issues by using a dedicated downloader rather than a web browser, usually wget. I've never had a wget downloaded .iso fail verification. Thus I rarely bother to try to verify any more.
I go back to the days of buying the boxed set and installing from the CD. However, except for today, I've not had one fail the check. Regardless, I have now tried 2 different USB sticks and neither boots, but both can be read to show the 15.4 files. Seems to me someone messed up with this one.
On 2022-06-08 10:38, James Knott wrote:
I downloaded the current ISO and, after renaming it, it passed the sha256sum check. However, after copying to the USB stick, it's not bootable. The stick is read, as indicated by the flashing LED, but then it falls through to the grub menu for 15.3. I have been running openSUSE and SUSE before it for around 20 years and never had such problems installing it.
When I went to upgrade, the same happened to me. For some reason, my UEFI settings still wanted to boot from disk, even though I have it set to boot from USB, if available -- or so I believe. Maybe I set it back to boot from disk, I dunno. So since this is happening to you, I'd suggest you check the system setup to make sure it will boot from USB.
On 2022-06-08 1:19 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 10:38, James Knott wrote:
I downloaded the current ISO and, after renaming it, it passed the sha256sum check. However, after copying to the USB stick, it's not bootable. The stick is read, as indicated by the flashing LED, but then it falls through to the grub menu for 15.3. I have been running openSUSE and SUSE before it for around 20 years and never had such problems installing it.
When I went to upgrade, the same happened to me. For some reason, my UEFI settings still wanted to boot from disk, even though I have it set to boot from USB, if available -- or so I believe. Maybe I set it back to boot from disk, I dunno. So since this is happening to you, I'd suggest you check the system setup to make sure it will boot from USB.
I'm doing this on my ThinkPad, which is not UEFI and which I have been installing from USB for years. When I tried the first time, when the check failed, I was at least able to boot to run the media check. Since then, it falls through to grub. I frequently boot from USB, most recently a couple of days ago. When I get a cumulative update in Windows 10, I have to use fdisk to make the Windows partition bootable and when done boot from a rescue USB stick to set it back. I did that on Monday.
James Knott wrote:
I downloaded the current ISO and, after renaming it, it passed the sha256sum check. However, after copying to the USB stick, it's not bootable. The stick is read, as indicated by the flashing LED, but then it falls through to the grub menu for 15.3. I have been running openSUSE and SUSE before it for around 20 years and never had such problems installing it.
I just tested this, after having made a bootable USB stick with the aforementioned ISO image from http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/. Then I booted into the stick and the installation routine started, with no problems. Per Inge
Op woensdag 8 juni 2022 17:15:57 CEST schreef Darryl Gregorash:
On 2022-06-08 08:16, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 10:12 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file.
Yes,
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file.
Here is the link that I download from.
https://get.opensuse.org/leap/15.4/#download
I'm using the Firefox browser to download the ISO. The network image is also providing the wrong file.
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
Most likely the problem is that the .iso file does not have the same name as mentioned in the .iso.sha256 file. When you rename the .iso file to that name it will check OK. -- fr.gr. member openSUSE Freek de Kruijf
On 2022-06-08 09:47, Freek de Kruijf wrote:
Op woensdag 8 juni 2022 17:15:57 CEST schreef Darryl Gregorash:
On 2022-06-08 08:16, James Knott wrote:
<snip>
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
Most likely the problem is that the .iso file does not have the same name as mentioned in the .iso.sha256 file. When you rename the .iso file to that name it will check OK.
When you download the files from the repo everything is symlinked to the proper file that has the build number in it. So for example, openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Current.iso is a symlink to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Build243.2-Media.iso and openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Current.iso.sha256 is a link to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Build243.2-Media.iso.sha256 The problem appears only to exist when you download from get.o.o, as James has stated. So from the actual repo, the only thing you need to concern yourself with is getting the correct files for your architecture.
On 2022-06-08 12:16 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
When you download the files from the repo everything is symlinked to the proper file that has the build number in it. So for example, openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Current.iso is a symlink to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Build243.2-Media.iso and openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Current.iso.sha256 is a link to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-aarch64-Build243.2-Media.iso.sha256
Did you try making a bootable USB stick and installing from it? I installed "Current" and it doesn't boot. At least the one from the opensuse site was bootable, even if it failed the check.
On 2022-06-08 11:05, James Knott wrote:
Did you try making a bootable USB stick and installing from it? I installed "Current" and it doesn't boot. At least the one from the opensuse site was bootable, even if it failed the check.
Yes. I had to reset the BIOS to boot from USB, but after that, all went as expected.
On 2022-06-08 1:22 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 11:05, James Knott wrote:
Did you try making a bootable USB stick and installing from it? I installed "Current" and it doesn't boot. At least the one from the opensuse site was bootable, even if it failed the check.
Yes. I had to reset the BIOS to boot from USB, but after that, all went as expected.
I just booted from my trusty System Rescue USB stick. No problem. I have used both SUSE Studio Imagewriter and dd to copy the image to 2 different USB sticks. I have tried both full and net install and all fail. Yet the first one I tried, which failed the media check booted.
On 2022-06-08 1:31 p.m., James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 1:22 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 11:05, James Knott wrote:
Did you try making a bootable USB stick and installing from it? I installed "Current" and it doesn't boot. At least the one from the opensuse site was bootable, even if it failed the check.
Yes. I had to reset the BIOS to boot from USB, but after that, all went as expected.
I just booted from my trusty System Rescue USB stick. No problem. I have used both SUSE Studio Imagewriter and dd to copy the image to 2 different USB sticks. I have tried both full and net install and all fail. Yet the first one I tried, which failed the media check booted.
I finally got a bootable image that passes the media check. I got it from the Waterloo repository. Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail.
On 2022-06-08 20:36, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 1:31 p.m., James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 1:22 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 11:05, James Knott wrote:
Did you try making a bootable USB stick and installing from it? I installed "Current" and it doesn't boot. At least the one from the opensuse site was bootable, even if it failed the check.
Yes. I had to reset the BIOS to boot from USB, but after that, all went as expected.
I just booted from my trusty System Rescue USB stick. No problem. I have used both SUSE Studio Imagewriter and dd to copy the image to 2 different USB sticks. I have tried both full and net install and all fail. Yet the first one I tried, which failed the media check booted.
I finally got a bootable image that passes the media check. I got it from the Waterloo repository.
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail.
It is not. Whatever method you used to download it, combined with symlinking at the server, changed the name. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 3:53 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail. It is not.
Whatever method you used to download it, combined with symlinking at the server, changed the name.
I have been installing openSUSE for years and have never run into this issue before. What's different this time. I start from the opensuse site.
On 2022-06-08 21:59, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 3:53 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail. It is not.
Whatever method you used to download it, combined with symlinking at the server, changed the name.
I have been installing openSUSE for years and have never run into this issue before. What's different this time. I start from the opensuse site.
The difference is the symlinking magic. Just issue the verifying command manually with the actual filename you have, not the one it thinks you have. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 4:03 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
I have been installing openSUSE for years and have never run into this issue before. What's different this time. I start from the opensuse site. The difference is the symlinking magic.
Just issue the verifying command manually with the actual filename you have, not the one it thinks you have.
I go to opensuse.org to download 15.4.. By downloading the files that are offered, I wind up with a sha256sum that doesn't match the ISO downloaded from the same page. Why is that? That's something that should never happen.
* James Knott
On 2022-06-08 4:03 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
I have been installing openSUSE for years and have never run into this issue before. What's different this time. I start from the opensuse site. The difference is the symlinking magic.
Just issue the verifying command manually with the actual filename you have, not the one it thinks you have.
I go to opensuse.org to download 15.4.. By downloading the files that are offered, I wind up with a sha256sum that doesn't match the ISO downloaded from the same page. Why is that? That's something that should never happen.
you have a "local" problem, computer or in front. I just dl'd DVD-15.4 following your instructions and the checksum matches. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo paka @ IRCnet oftc
On 2022-06-08 22:12, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 4:03 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
I have been installing openSUSE for years and have never run into this issue before. What's different this time. I start from the opensuse site. The difference is the symlinking magic.
Just issue the verifying command manually with the actual filename you have, not the one it thinks you have.
I go to opensuse.org to download 15.4.. By downloading the files that are offered, I wind up with a sha256sum that doesn't match the ISO downloaded from the same page. Why is that? That's something that should never happen.
Your interpretation is faulty. The checksum matches (99.9% sure). The file you downloaded has the wrong name, that's all. That makes the way you run the check to fail. Rename the file you downloaded to the name that it should have, and you will get the "correct" result. Or just don't run that command, run it manually with the correct parameters. You probaby downloaded openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Current.iso.sha256. Check it contents: 4683345f242397c7fd7d89a50731a120ffd60a24460e21d2634e783b3c169695 openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso Probably your iso has a different name. Doesn't matter. Is the checksum "4683345f242397c7fd7d89a50731a120ffd60a24460e21d2634e783b3c169695"? That is all that matters, ignore the filename. If the .asc file is a different one, just change that file name and contents in the explanation and repeat it. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 5:17 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
The file you downloaded has the wrong name, that's all. That makes the way you run the check to fail.
I have no control over that. The opensuse web site provides the links which I click on. I am not given the opportunity to choose the correct file. I can only download what I'm offered and that is broken.
On 2022-06-08 5:17 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Probably your iso has a different name. Doesn't matter. Is the checksum "4683345f242397c7fd7d89a50731a120ffd60a24460e21d2634e783b3c169695"? That is all that matters, ignore the filename.
As I have said, I can do and have done that. However, if I download a sha256sum file from the web site, I expect it to look for the correct file. That does not work because the ISO has the wrong file name. I have used this method many times over the years, going back to when md5sum was used. It has always been the same. You use the command -c filename. It doesn't now.
On 2022-06-08 23:22, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 5:17 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Probably your iso has a different name. Doesn't matter. Is the checksum "4683345f242397c7fd7d89a50731a120ffd60a24460e21d2634e783b3c169695"? That is all that matters, ignore the filename.
As I have said, I can do and have done that. However, if I download a sha256sum file from the web site, I expect it to look for the correct file. That does not work because the ISO has the wrong file name. I have used this method many times over the years, going back to when md5sum was used. It has always been the same. You use the command -c filename. It doesn't now.
Just stop providing nice links, and problem is gone. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 5:17 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Your interpretation is faulty.
The checksum matches (99.9% sure).
Carlos, why are you being so thick??? When I go to opensuse.org and download the ISO, the downloaded file is openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso. Notice the Build243.2 in there? Now here is the contents of the checksum file. 4683345f242397c7fd7d89a50731a120ffd60a24460e21d2634e783b3c169695 openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso Do you see "Build243.2-Media" anywhere in there? That file name in there is supposed to match the actual file. It doesn't. Sure, the sha256sum matches, but you cannot just use the command sha256sum -c <filename>. You have to manually run sha256sum against the file and visually compare. That's bad enough with one file, but what if there are several files listed? It should check them all with the -c option, but can't if the names don't match. This had been the way it's worked for many years. Why should it suddenly be OK to break this now? Going the other way, when you create a check file, you use sha256sum <filename> > shasum.txt, you will have a text file with the original file name and the check and you can be sure the file name in the check file will match the original file. As for not getting the right file, if you go to the page to download the file, you will also see a drop down list, where you select the checksum file. So, given they are delivered together, why do the names not match, other than someone being an f'n idiot about it? Whoever put that file name there with the Build243.2-Media in the name, without it also in the check file clearly does not know what the hell they're doing!
On 2022-06-11 23:09, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 5:17 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Your interpretation is faulty.
The checksum matches (99.9% sure).
Carlos, why are you being so thick??? When I go to opensuse.org and download the ISO, the downloaded file is openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso. Notice the Build243.2 in there?
Now here is the contents of the checksum file. 4683345f242397c7fd7d89a50731a120ffd60a24460e21d2634e783b3c169695 openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso
Do you see "Build243.2-Media" anywhere in there? That file name in there is supposed to match the actual file. It doesn't.
So rename it. Big deal. The name is irrelevant. The checksum is what is relevant. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 13:59, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 3:53 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail. It is not.
Whatever method you used to download it, combined with symlinking at the server, changed the name.
I have been installing openSUSE for years and have never run into this issue before. What's different this time. I start from the opensuse site.
You may simply have been directed to a repo that hadn't been properly updated. I thought that is what the past 2 weeks was for, but... shrug. Recall that, a couple of hours ago, jdd had a repo toss a 404 error at him, then a few minutes later, it was working fine.
On 2022-06-08 12:36, James Knott wrote:
I finally got a bootable image that passes the media check. I got it from the Waterloo repository.
Hmm, I was going to suggest you clean everything out and start afresh -- with that same exact repo too :D
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail.
I have checked many of those .sha256 files, and have yet to find one that does not point to the correct one for the ISO image. Note, again, that in every instance, the files have always been links to the one that contains Build243.2 in the name.
On 2022-06-08 4:30 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 12:36, James Knott wrote:
I finally got a bootable image that passes the media check. I got it from the Waterloo repository.
Hmm, I was going to suggest you clean everything out and start afresh -- with that same exact repo too :D
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail. I have checked many of those .sha256 files, and have yet to find one that does not point to the correct one for the ISO image. Note, again, that in every instance, the files have always been links to the one that contains Build243.2 in the name.
Go to opensuse.org Go to 15.4 and click on update to leap 15.4 Click on download Download offline image for x86_64 You will see build 243.2 in the file name to be downloaded Download the sha256sum file and see what file it looks for. You will not see build 243.2. This means the sha256sum check will be unable to find the file to check. What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that.
On 2022-06-08 14:37, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 4:30 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 12:36, James Knott wrote:
I finally got a bootable image that passes the media check. I got it from the Waterloo repository.
Hmm, I was going to suggest you clean everything out and start afresh -- with that same exact repo too :D
Also, why is the file name in the sha256sum file different than the actual file. That's a guaranteed fail. I have checked many of those .sha256 files, and have yet to find one that does not point to the correct one for the ISO image. Note, again, that in every instance, the files have always been links to the one that contains Build243.2 in the name.
Go to opensuse.org Go to 15.4 and click on update to leap 15.4 Click on download Download offline image for x86_64 You will see build 243.2 in the file name to be downloaded Download the sha256sum file and see what file it looks for. You will not see build 243.2. This means the sha256sum check will be unable to find the file to check.
What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that.
For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie. The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
On 2022-06-08 4:47 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that. For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie.
The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't.
On 2022-06-08 23:00, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 4:47 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that. For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie.
The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't.
Big deal. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 5:19 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't. Big deal.
What's the point of providing broken resources on the opensuse site?
On 2022-06-08 23:23, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 5:19 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't. Big deal.
What's the point of providing broken resources on the opensuse site?
Volunteers anyone? ;-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
On 2022-06-08 15:19, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2022-06-08 23:00, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 4:47 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that. For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie.
The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't.
Big deal.
Oh Lord God Almighty, Carlos, give it a rest PLEASE?
On 2022-06-08 23:34, Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2022-06-08 15:19, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2022-06-08 23:00, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 4:47 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that. For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie.
The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't.
Big deal.
Oh Lord God Almighty, Carlos, give it a rest PLEASE?
I'm not the one that is complaining! -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
Carlos E. R. composed on 2022-06-09 18:10 (UTC+0200):
I'm not the one that is complaining!
No, but you are the one adding nothing useful, who is adding lots of useless full quotes to pollute web searches. If I was a mod, following the first such in a thread, the rest would be bit bucketed on the basis of sender without attempting to read them. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata
On 2022-06-08 15:00, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 4:47 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
What I did was run sha256sum on the ISO can compared the results with the contents of the sha256sum file. I shouldn't have to do that. For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie.
The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
Whatever. It's a problem if someone goes to the opensuse site and follows the steps, but winds up with bad file names. Great if you didn't have that issue, but others have. I have no control over the repositories that are used with those links. I see the one I get is uwaterloo. I do not have any other option. I just checked and it's still handing out the file with build 243.2 in it. I know enough to manually check the sha256sum, but many others don't.
45 minutes ago, Waterloo was working just fine -- I checked most ISO files and sha checksum files, and every time got a re-direct to the corresponding file with Build243.2 in the filename. I got the same result by downloading everything from get.o.o -- including the same filenames. That was 45 minutes ago, and I think up until about 20 minutes ago, things still looked OK. If you think you were having problems before, now the Waterloo repo is an absolute mess. Many of the links that used to exist there are gone, and the checksum files are no longer files to be downloaded. Instead, FF just opens them as text files. Once again, this has all happened in the past half hour to 45 minutes. When you first posted earlier today, I checked EVERYTHING on the Waterloo repo, and checked that against what get.o.o was shipping me, and I assure you, there was absolutely no problem with any of it. What has happened just now is incomprehensible, but I have to say that, for the time being, the repo at U Waterloo is broken.
On 2022-06-08 5:33 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
45 minutes ago, Waterloo was working just fine -- I checked most ISO files and sha checksum files, and every time got a re-direct to the corresponding file with Build243.2 in the filename. I got the same result by downloading everything from get.o.o -- including the same filenames.
That was 45 minutes ago, and I think up until about 20 minutes ago, things still looked OK.
Now download the checksum file and see if it includes Build243.2. It doesn't, which means you can not use the sha256sum -c command. You have to manually run sha256sum against the ISO file and then compare it with the listed sha256sum.
On 2022-06-08 17:29, James Knott wrote:
On 2022-06-08 5:33 p.m., Darryl Gregorash wrote:
45 minutes ago, Waterloo was working just fine -- I checked most ISO files and sha checksum files, and every time got a re-direct to the corresponding file with Build243.2 in the filename. I got the same result by downloading everything from get.o.o -- including the same filenames.
That was 45 minutes ago, and I think up until about 20 minutes ago, things still looked OK.
Now download the checksum file and see if it includes Build243.2. It doesn't, which means you can not use the sha256sum -c command. You have to manually run sha256sum against the ISO file and then compare it with the listed sha256sum.
Why don't you just go to the Waterloo repo and have a look yourself? I said the symlinks are all gone, which should have told you something. Meanwhile, Dalhousie still seems to be a faithful copy of download.o.o As for doing the checksum, you do not have to follow that manual procedure at all. Simply copying the ISO filename into the clipboard, then pasting that over the filename in the SHA file will work just fine, and it is much more simple and faster.
Darryl Gregorash wrote:
For the VERY LAST time, James, it does not matter if I download from get.o.o or from download.o.o. Every time, the file I get is the one with Build243.2 in the filename. I have now seen this directly from the main repo and from the mirrors at both Waterloo and Dalhousie.
From Waterloo and Dalhousie both, whether with wget or Firefox, I get "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso". From download.o.o, I see redirects to the Build243 name, but with wget it is still saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso" -
ftp.gwdg.de - same behaviour as Waterloo and Dalhousie.
The problem is clearly with the repo you were directed to on the first try. Maybe that is cleared up by now, maybe not. But it is not a problem with the filenames on download.o.o
There _is_ something wrong with the redirection though. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland.
Le 08/06/2022 à 17:15, Darryl Gregorash a écrit :
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
just now, 404 not found http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/openSUSE-Leap... jdd -- http://dodin.org http://valeriedodin.com
On 2022-06-08 11:07, jdd@dodin.org wrote:
Le 08/06/2022 à 17:15, Darryl Gregorash a écrit :
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
just now, 404 not found
http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/openSUSE-Leap...
It's working fine here. This morning when I checked things, I was connecting with the main repo at download.o.o and just now, with the mirror at Univ. of Waterloo. So maybe it's a problem with the particular mirror you were sent to?
Le 08/06/2022 à 19:29, Darryl Gregorash a écrit :
On 2022-06-08 11:07, jdd@dodin.org wrote:
Le 08/06/2022 à 17:15, Darryl Gregorash a écrit :
Go to http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/ and download the files from there. You will definitely get the correct ISO image from there -- that is what I did last week, and the file verified OK.
just now, 404 not found
http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/openSUSE-current/iso/openSUSE-Leap...
It's working fine here. This morning when I checked things, I was connecting with the main repo at download.o.o and just now, with the mirror at Univ. of Waterloo. So maybe it's a problem with the particular mirror you were sent to?
it works now, may be an incomplete mirror jdd -- http://dodin.org http://valeriedodin.com
Am 08.06.22 um 16:16 schrieb James Knott:
On 2022-06-08 10:12 a.m., Per Jessen wrote:
I downloaded it from opensuse.org this morning, along with the checksum file. I just checked again and the site is still providing that file. Yes,
openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso is symlinked to openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2-Media.iso
When I download it with 'wget', it gets saved as "openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso", but I can clearly see redirects to the Build243 file.
Here is the link that I download from.
https://get.opensuse.org/leap/15.4/#download
I'm using the Firefox browser to download the ISO. The network image is also providing the wrong file.
I can confirm that there is obviously a difference whether the download is via Firefox or wget. https://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/15.4/iso/openSUSE-Leap-15.4-... The former doesn't compute the "checksum "ok". Peter
When I download the ISO I get openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Build243.2- Media.iso. Its sha256sum matches the sha256sum file value, but the named doesn't match so the verify fails. Something seems wrong with whatever magic happens with downloads. I guess that is mirrorbrain. I haven't installed that ISO but I have installed previous versions and that has been running just fine for a few weeks. I have also upgraded a few running systems from 15.3 to 15.4 with zypper dup. That went very smoothly. zypper --releasever=15.4 ref zypper --releasever=15.4 dup --download-only zypper --releasever=15.4 dup I like to get it downloaded before I start the update in case the network fails during the update. Bill On Wed, 2022-06-08 at 09:50 -0400, James Knott wrote:
After downloading the ISO and sha256sum files, I checked the integrity, but it failed.
> sha256sum -c openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso.sha256 sha256sum: openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso: No such file or directory openSUSE-Leap-15.4-DVD-x86_64-Media.iso: FAILED open or read sha256sum: WARNING: 1 listed file could not be read
I then copied the ISO to a USB stick, using SUSE Studio Imagewriter and booted the image to do media check, but it failed.
participants (12)
-
Andrei Borzenkov -
Bill Merriam -
Carlos E. R. -
Darryl Gregorash -
Felix Miata -
Freek de Kruijf -
James Knott -
jdd＠dodin.org -
Patrick Shanahan -
Per Inge Oestmoen -
Per Jessen -
Peter McD