On 15/10/2023 01:23, Jonathan Billings wrote:
On Oct 14, 2023, at 14:06, John Pilkington <johnpilk222@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have done several system upgrades in the past. This time I thought
I would take the suggested precautions and download the workstation .iso
On trying to verify the download, using
https://fedoraproject.org/en/workstation/download/
I got a report that "17 lines are improperly formatted". So I worried
and did it again. Same result.
This is BZ 733561, opened in 2011 and NOTABUG. Isn't it time that
this was mentioned in the 'helpful' warning suggestion?
I agree that the wording in the instructions could be better.
The CHECKSUM file has a GPG signature and the sha256sum of ISO, so the
sha256sum command will give a warning that there are improperly
formatted lines (the GPG signature). But, as the instructions say: “If
the output states that the file is valid, then it's ready to use!”
That's fine. But the response doesn't say that the file is valid, only
that there is a formatting problem. The documentation is misleading,
and has been for years.
It would be nice if there was a way to make sha256sum ignore the GPG
key, but you should:
1.) make sure the GPG signature is valid.
2.) look to see if it says the file you downloaded is OK and ignore the
warning about improperly formatted lines, since you know from the
previous step that those lines are ok.
--
Jonathan Billings
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
