*BSD News Article 31578


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!bsd.coe.montana.edu!nate
From: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 1.1 CD-Rom
Date: 12 Jun 1994 21:39:50 GMT
Organization: Montana State University, Bozeman  Montana
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <2tfvb6$mhg@pdq.coe.montana.edu>
References: <Cr52sq.AvK@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <2t8h0u$5kv@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <mldCrAxBB.42M@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.90.192.29

In article <mldCrAxBB.42M@netcom.com>, Matthew Deter <mld@netcom.com> wrote:
>Nate Williams (nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu) wrote:
>: In article <Cr52sq.AvK@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>,
>: Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>: >I noticed (without really paying attention) some articles concerning
>: >problems reading the FreeBSD 1.1 CD-Rom.  Could someone tell me what
>: >the problem is?  Are fixed versions identifiable without trying to
>: >read the whole disk?
>
>: The master that WC used to make the 1.1 CD's was corrupt, and hence
>: some of the unpacked files in /port and /sys are corrupt.
>
>Do these files extract from the tarfile OK?  i.e. if my tarfile
>extracts ok, do I have a good disk?  Or is the corruption one level
>lower, such that the actual files are bad, but the tarfile is good?

The tarfiles are okay, but other files (some in ports, some package
files, etc ) are not.  You can install from what you have but DON'T
assume the stuff in /ports is okay.  However, it is VERY obvious when
a file is bad since it's either full of complete garbage or it has
really bogus sizes and it's full of complete garbage.



Nate

-- 
nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu     |  FreeBSD core member and all around tech.
nate@cs.montana.edu          |  weenie.
work #: (406) 994-4836       | 
home #: (406) 586-0579       |  Available for contract/otherwise work.