LWN: Comments on "Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 CD/DVD images updated (r0a)" https://lwn.net/Articles/139360/ This is a special feed containing comments posted to the individual LWN article titled "Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 CD/DVD images updated (r0a)". en-us Mon, 15 Sep 2025 10:45:36 +0000 Mon, 15 Sep 2025 10:45:36 +0000 https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification lwn@lwn.net Do you need help? https://lwn.net/Articles/139457/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139457/ piman <font class="QuotedText">&gt; Reread the announcement above. Reread the paragraph that starts with "If you have already...".</font><br> <p> Which is useful if you've installed a system already, but useless if you're intending to burn and distribute CDs. In that case, you need to redownload (or ideally, rebuild, if you used jigdo) CD 1.<br> Mon, 13 Jun 2005 02:50:20 +0000 Do you need help? https://lwn.net/Articles/139451/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139451/ lordsutch And, if you use jigdo, I doubt downloading the fixed image would be more than a few kilobytes (mostly to get the updated .jigdo file).<br> Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:39:07 +0000 Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 CD/DVD images updated (r0a) https://lwn.net/Articles/139444/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139444/ madscientist There was also a very minor glitch, where the text file in the CD build was still stating that Sarge was unstable, because someone forgot to update it.<br> <p> I posted a message on debian-user that these things should be added to a "what to check right before you release" checklist. I have no idea whether such a thing already exists, but IMO if it doesn't it absolutely should: if you're only going to release the thing once every three years you can't very well expect anyone to REMEMBER all those little details!!<br> Sun, 12 Jun 2005 23:56:08 +0000 Do you need help? https://lwn.net/Articles/139435/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139435/ jstAusr The file gets used in different ways while the release is in development. The security source lines weren't used during development, but should have been activated prior to release. I wish I were so perfect that I could criticize someone for that.<br> <p> Reread the announcement above. Reread the paragraph that starts with "If you have already...". Post a message stating why that paragraph is unclear to you, when taken as a portion of the rest of the announcement.<br> <p> Another option would be to re-download the first CD, but that seems like it would be alot of work to fix one line in /etc/apt/sources.list, wouldn't it?<br> Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:08:33 +0000 Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 CD/DVD images updated (r0a) https://lwn.net/Articles/139438/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139438/ piman Only the one with the base system, CD 1.<br> Sun, 12 Jun 2005 17:29:20 +0000 Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 CD/DVD images updated (r0a) https://lwn.net/Articles/139434/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139434/ ronaldcole Did I miss something important in the announcement? Only one file needed to be fixed. I downloaded all 14 binary iso CD images. Which one do I need to re-download? Or am I expect to hammer Debian's servers again re-downloading all 14 files?<br> Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:42:20 +0000 Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 CD/DVD images updated (r0a) https://lwn.net/Articles/139408/ https://lwn.net/Articles/139408/ amacater Slight correction: this isn't a new release as such. The initial CD/DVD<br> images (which probably lasted less than a day in total after release) had a<br> mistake in the setup lines for apt on install - they didn't correctly<br> download from the Debian security site. The fix is on the Debian web site -<br> if you did inadvertently install from the broken disk images, you don't<br> need to re-install, all you need do is check and edit /etc/apt/sources.list.<br> Debian release is still 3.0r0 - the CD and DVD images have been updated as<br> 3.0r0a but, essentially, there's almost no change at all. The comment on<br> Slashdot about "Obviously this was a rushed job. Typical Debian, always<br> cutting corners, never taking times to do things properly :P. " probably<br> puts this into it's correct perspective - after nearly three years, a tiny<br> glitch has attracted massive inadvertent publicity. [The Slashdot comment<br> was moderated as +5 Funny - and deserved it :) ]<br> Sat, 11 Jun 2005 19:12:12 +0000