I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
Thanks.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope by Mark H. Nichols on
2009-11-02T00:40:29+00:00
On Nov 1, 2009, at 7:32 PM, John Graddy wrote:
> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't
> seem
> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
Here. ftp://ubuntu.osuosl.org/pub/ubuntu-releases/
Mark
Re: Jaunty Jackalope by born on
2009-11-02T00:41:30+00:00
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/downloadmirrors
this is the mirror list.
2009/11/2 John Graddy <jwgraddy@valornet.com>
> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> /downloadmirrors">http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/downloadmirrors</a><br>
this is the mirror list.<br><br><div class=3D"gmail-quote">2009/11/2 John G=
raddy <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:jwgraddy@valornet.com">jwgrad=
dy@valornet.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail-quote" style=
=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; p=
adding-left: 1ex;">
I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. =A0releases.ubuntu doesn't se=
em<br>
to work. =A0Everything that I find with Google seems to go to<br>
releases.ubuntu. =A0Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?<br=
>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<font color=3D"#888888"><br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>
Re: Jaunty Jackalope by NoOp on
2009-11-02T00:52:57+00:00
On 11/01/2009 05:32 PM, John Graddy wrote:
> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
Seems like a main webpage issue. A note to:
webmaster@ubuntu.com
might be in order.
http://releases.ubuntu.com/
http://releases.ubuntu.com/jaunty/
works for me.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope by Karl F. Larsen on
2009-11-02T11:50:43+00:00
John Graddy wrote:
> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
Go to any place you can get Ubuntu http://www.ubuntu.com/
and look around. They are pushing 9.10 today but you get 9.04
from the same place.
73 Karl
Re: Jaunty Jackalope by NoOp on
2009-11-02T15:56:00+00:00
On 11/02/2009 04:47 AM, Karl F. Larsen wrote:
> John Graddy wrote:
>> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
>> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
>> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
> Go to any place you can get Ubuntu http://www.ubuntu.com/
>
> and look around. They are pushing 9.10 today but you get 9.04
> from the same place.
Actually you can't. That's the point I was making in
Seems like a main webpage issue. A note to:
webmaster@ubuntu.com
might be in order.
There is no easy way to find 9.04 on the newly designed website. I
looked and I can't figure out how to get 9.04 from the www.ubuntu.com
website, can you?
http://releases.ubuntu.com/
http://releases.ubuntu.com/jaunty/
Works, but of course that's because I knew where to look & didn't get
that info from the www.ubuntu.com website.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope by Ian Coetzee on
2009-11-02T16:05:25+00:00
On 02/11/2009 18:52, NoOp wrote:
> On 11/02/2009 04:47 AM, Karl F. Larsen wrote:
>
>> John Graddy wrote:
>>
>>> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
>>> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
>>> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Go to any place you can get Ubuntu http://www.ubuntu.com/
>>
>> and look around. They are pushing 9.10 today but you get 9.04
>> from the same place.
>>
> Actually you can't. That's the point I was making in
>
> Seems like a main webpage issue. A note to:
> webmaster@ubuntu.com
> might be in order.
>
> There is no easy way to find 9.04 on the newly designed website. I
> looked and I can't figure out how to get 9.04 from the www.ubuntu.com
> website, can you?
>
> http://releases.ubuntu.com/
> http://releases.ubuntu.com/jaunty/
>
> Works, but of course that's because I knew where to look& didn't get
> that info from the www.ubuntu.com website.
>
>
>
I usually just head to my nearest mirror to download images, I do see
your point though, they dont even have links to the other distros
Regards
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by John Graddy on
2009-11-02T22:53:33+00:00
Thanks to all who responded. I now have what I need. However, I do
have a new question.
I have downloaded a release to one computer. I did an MD5SUM and all is
OK. However, if I copy the iso file to a usb flash drive and move it to
a different computer, I get a totally different md5sum on the file after
I put it on the hard disk.
Is something getting changed in the transfer process that I'm using???
If anyone has an answer, please answer me directly rather than using the
list. I probably shouldn't have asked a new question in a thread that
has been resolved.
Thanks,
John
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 19:32 -0600, John Graddy wrote:
> I want to download an iso of Ubuntu 9.04. releases.ubuntu doesn't seem
> to work. Everything that I find with Google seems to go to
> releases.ubuntu. Does anyone know where a 9.04 iso can be downloaded?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by NoOp on
2009-11-02T23:05:43+00:00
On 11/02/2009 03:51 PM, John Graddy wrote:
> Thanks to all who responded. I now have what I need. However, I do
> have a new question.
>
> I have downloaded a release to one computer. I did an MD5SUM and all is
> OK. However, if I copy the iso file to a usb flash drive and move it to
> a different computer, I get a totally different md5sum on the file after
> I put it on the hard disk.
>
> Is something getting changed in the transfer process that I'm using???
No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by John Graddy on
2009-11-03T01:45:18+00:00
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 16:02 -0800, NoOp wrote:
> On 11/02/2009 03:51 PM, John Graddy wrote:
> > Thanks to all who responded. I now have what I need. However, I do
> > have a new question.
> >
> > I have downloaded a release to one computer. I did an MD5SUM and all is
> > OK. However, if I copy the iso file to a usb flash drive and move it to
> > a different computer, I get a totally different md5sum on the file after
> > I put it on the hard disk.
> >
> > Is something getting changed in the transfer process that I'm using???
>
> No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
>
>
>
I'm continually impressed by the knowledge of folks on this list.
I didn't have a clue that the md5sum would change. How do you learn
about that kind of stuff??
Thanks,
John
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by NoOp on
2009-11-03T01:52:49+00:00
On 11/02/2009 06:42 PM, John Graddy wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 16:02 -0800, NoOp wrote:
>> On 11/02/2009 03:51 PM, John Graddy wrote:
>> > Thanks to all who responded. I now have what I need. However, I do
>> > have a new question.
>> >
>> > I have downloaded a release to one computer. I did an MD5SUM and all is
>> > OK. However, if I copy the iso file to a usb flash drive and move it to
>> > a different computer, I get a totally different md5sum on the file after
>> > I put it on the hard disk.
>> >
>> > Is something getting changed in the transfer process that I'm using???
>>
>> No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
>>
>>
>>
> I'm continually impressed by the knowledge of folks on this list.
>
> I didn't have a clue that the md5sum would change. How do you learn
> about that kind of stuff??
From this list :-) There was quite a discussion about this very issue
some time ago. I'll see if I can dig out the thread tomorrow.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by Karl Auer on
2009-11-03T01:53:11+00:00
Why? The .iso is just a file, shouldn't it always have the same md5sum?
In fact, if it doesn't, what is the point of the md5sum?
Not contradicting you, just surprised and curious.
Regards, K.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by NoOp on
2009-11-03T02:10:58+00:00
On 11/02/2009 06:50 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 16:02 -0800, NoOp wrote:
>> > No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
>
> Why? The .iso is just a file, shouldn't it always have the same md5sum?
> In fact, if it doesn't, what is the point of the md5sum?
>
> Not contradicting you, just surprised and curious.
>
> Regards, K.
>
>
Can't find the exact thread just now, but I do recall a thread where
this was discussed & made a point of it in this thread back in March:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2009-March/176290.html
I'll look further tomorrow.
Gary
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by James Michael Fultz on
2009-11-03T02:27:01+00:00
* NoOp <glgxg@sbcglobal.net> [2009-11-02 18:50 -0800]:
> On 11/02/2009 06:42 PM, John Graddy wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 16:02 -0800, NoOp wrote:
> >> No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
> >>
> > I'm continually impressed by the knowledge of folks on this list.
> >
> > I didn't have a clue that the md5sum would change. How do you learn
> > about that kind of stuff??
>
> From this list :-) There was quite a discussion about this very issue
> some time ago. I'll see if I can dig out the thread tomorrow.
Then someone was misinformed. The MD5 sum should match if a file copy
operation is error-free. Copying a file between storage devices is
equivalent to downloading it for as much as the MD5 sum should remain
consistent. Just today I copied an ISO between two disks and was able
to verify by MD5 sum.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by NoOp on
2009-11-03T02:35:13+00:00
On 11/02/2009 07:07 PM, NoOp wrote:
> On 11/02/2009 06:50 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 16:02 -0800, NoOp wrote:
>>> > No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
>>
>> Why? The .iso is just a file, shouldn't it always have the same md5sum?
>> In fact, if it doesn't, what is the point of the md5sum?
>>
>> Not contradicting you, just surprised and curious.
>>
>> Regards, K.
>>
>>
>
> Can't find the exact thread just now, but I do recall a thread where
> this was discussed & made a point of it in this thread back in March:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2009-March/176290.html
Here is a recent real life example. I downloaded the most recent karmic
liveCD so that I could test an inplace reinstall on karmic for Emil
Payne (see the "Dist Upgrade" thread. Note to Emil - works with Karmic
live CD BTW so there is hope).
I now check the md5sum of the iso:
$ md5sum ubuntu-9.10-desktop-i386.iso
8790491bfa9d00f283ed9dd2d77b3906 ubuntu-9.10-desktop-i386.iso
and see that it matches:
http://releases.ubuntu.com/karmic/MD5SUMS
8790491bfa9d00f283ed9dd2d77b3906 *ubuntu-9.10-desktop-i386.iso
Now I burn the iso to a cd & check the md5sum of that cd:
$ md5sum /dev/cdrom
8790491bfa9d00f283ed9dd2d77b3906 /dev/cdrom
And I've just now proven myself wrong :-( The md5sum of the CD matches
that of the iso. So apologies to the list, and to John Graddy. I'll
still see if I can find the thread tomorrow, but mea culpa & apologies
to all.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by Rashkae on
2009-11-03T02:39:43+00:00
John Graddy wrote:
>>>
>>> Is something getting changed in the transfer process that I'm using???
>> No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
>>
>>
>>
> I'm continually impressed by the knowledge of folks on this list.
>
> I didn't have a clue that the md5sum would change. How do you learn
> about that kind of stuff??
>
Eh, I'm having trouble figuring out if that was sarcasm, or if you
really believed that trite.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by Rashkae on
2009-11-03T02:51:26+00:00
NoOp wrote:
> On 11/02/2009 07:07 PM, NoOp wrote:
>> On 11/02/2009 06:50 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 16:02 -0800, NoOp wrote:
>>>>> No. The md5sum will change when you transfer the iso.
>>> Why? The .iso is just a file, shouldn't it always have the same md5sum?
>>> In fact, if it doesn't, what is the point of the md5sum?
>>>
>>> Not contradicting you, just surprised and curious.
>>>
>>> Regards, K.
>>>
>>>
>> Can't find the exact thread just now, but I do recall a thread where
>> this was discussed & made a point of it in this thread back in March:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/2009-March/176290.html
>
> Here is a recent real life example. I downloaded the most recent karmic
> liveCD so that I could test an inplace reinstall on karmic for Emil
> Payne (see the "Dist Upgrade" thread. Note to Emil - works with Karmic
> live CD BTW so there is hope).
>
> I now check the md5sum of the iso:
>
> $ md5sum ubuntu-9.10-desktop-i386.iso
> 8790491bfa9d00f283ed9dd2d77b3906 ubuntu-9.10-desktop-i386.iso
>
> and see that it matches:
> http://releases.ubuntu.com/karmic/MD5SUMS
> 8790491bfa9d00f283ed9dd2d77b3906 *ubuntu-9.10-desktop-i386.iso
>
> Now I burn the iso to a cd & check the md5sum of that cd:
> $ md5sum /dev/cdrom
> 8790491bfa9d00f283ed9dd2d77b3906 /dev/cdrom
>
> And I've just now proven myself wrong :-( The md5sum of the CD matches
> that of the iso. So apologies to the list, and to John Graddy. I'll
> still see if I can find the thread tomorrow, but mea culpa & apologies
> to all.
>
>
You're comparing the md5sum from a file to that of a CD. They will
sometimes not match because the lead out from writing to a cd appends
some nulls. It seems to depend on type of drive and exact command used
to burn cd, but either way, you cannot reliably compare md5sum of an iso
with the cdrom dev device. Rather, use isoinfo command to get the
exactly number of bytes, and use dd to pipe that from the cd to md5sum
Example: isodinfo -d -i /dev/cdrom will in the output, include a
'Volume size' number. For example, say it's 1000
dd if=/dev/dvd bs=2048 count=1000 | md5sum -
That md5sum should always match the iso file that was used to burn the cd.
None of this matters in John's case, however, since all he did was copy
the file from one hard drive to another, in which case, the md5sum
should absofuckinglutely not change. Either the thumb drive is
defective, or one the pc's has bad ram, or is corrupting data in the IO
path.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by James Michael Fultz on
2009-11-03T02:57:43+00:00
* NoOp <glgxg@sbcglobal.net> [2009-11-02 19:32 -0800]:
[...]
> And I've just now proven myself wrong :-( The md5sum of the CD matches
> that of the iso. So apologies to the list, and to John Graddy. I'll
> still see if I can find the thread tomorrow, but mea culpa & apologies
> to all.
Well, at least you've gotten me onto something I need to investigate.
Experience has told me that the MD5 has should match for all copies of
an error-free download, file copy, and CD burn. I was going to
demonstrate this when I found that they didn't for my copies of
Ubuntu 9.10 64-bit which I'd downloaded using BitTorrent.
$ wget -q -O - http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/ubuntu-releases/karmic/MD5SUMS
[...]
dc51c1d7e3e173dcab4e0b9ad2be2bbf *ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso
[...]
$ md5sum -b ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso
82a867bbfe856e50f4dcec9d7585193c *ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso
$ md5sum -b /dev/cdrom
f20000abc83e2b07cff2e1e6bddf44d3 */dev/cdrom
What on earth?! Yes, I've checked another mirror as well. Also
downloaded the .torrent file again, and Transmission verifies the ISO
100% complete.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by James Michael Fultz on
2009-11-03T03:03:43+00:00
* James Michael Fultz <croooow@gmail.com> [2009-11-02 22:55 -0500]:
[testing md5sum of ISO downloaded via BitTorrent]
> $ wget -q -O - http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/ubuntu-releases/karmic/MD5SUMS
> [...]
> dc51c1d7e3e173dcab4e0b9ad2be2bbf *ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso
> [...]
> $ md5sum -b ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso
> 82a867bbfe856e50f4dcec9d7585193c *ubuntu-9.10-desktop-amd64.iso
> $ md5sum -b /dev/cdrom
> f20000abc83e2b07cff2e1e6bddf44d3 */dev/cdrom
$ md5sum -b ubuntu-9.10-rc-desktop-amd64.iso
f20000abc83e2b07cff2e1e6bddf44d3 *ubuntu-9.10-rc-desktop-amd64.iso
Well, oops! I guess I was mixed up about the ISO I'd burned to disc.
Still doesn't explain the mismatch in MD5SUMS for an ISO downloaded via
BitTorrent.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by NoOp on
2009-11-03T15:52:04+00:00
On 11/02/2009 07:49 PM, Rashkae wrote:
> NoOp wrote:
...
>> And I've just now proven myself wrong :-( The md5sum of the CD matches
>> that of the iso. So apologies to the list, and to John Graddy. I'll
>> still see if I can find the thread tomorrow, but mea culpa & apologies
>> to all.
>
> You're comparing the md5sum from a file to that of a CD. They will
> sometimes not match because the lead out from writing to a cd appends
> some nulls. It seems to depend on type of drive and exact command used
> to burn cd, but either way, you cannot reliably compare md5sum of an iso
> with the cdrom dev device.
Ah, that's it. I still can't find the thread we this was discussed, but
this article might suffice instead :-)
<http://www.zyxware.com/articles/615/solution-to-checksum-error-and-md5-sum-error-in-brasero-k3b-and-other-burning-software>
Rather, use isoinfo command to get the
> exactly number of bytes, and use dd to pipe that from the cd to md5sum
>
> Example: isodinfo -d -i /dev/cdrom will in the output, include a
> 'Volume size' number. For example, say it's 1000
>
> dd if=/dev/dvd bs=2048 count=1000 | md5sum -
>
> That md5sum should always match the iso file that was used to burn the cd.
>
> None of this matters in John's case, however, since all he did was copy
> the file from one hard drive to another, in which case, the md5sum
> should absofuckinglutely not change. Either the thumb drive is
> defective, or one the pc's has bad ram, or is corrupting data in the IO
> path.
Yep. I was thinking about the CD issue (must have been a full moon out
last night).
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by Rashkae on
2009-11-03T17:00:58+00:00
NoOp wrote:
>
> Yep. I was thinking about the CD issue (must have been a full moon out
> last night).
>
>
And for my part, I apologize for my first comment on this thread. While
I certainly have never hesitated to jump into a cozy flameware, I mean
no disrespect to you NoOp
For anyone who's interested, I offer some further thoughts on cd burn
verification.
In theory, CD's, and especially dvd's.. already have tons of error
correction and checksumming built in. I have probably too much faith in
this built in error checking, and almost never bother verifying
checksums of burned ISO's or files. Either the drive is able to read
the data from the disc, or it reports I/O errors. Therefore, when I
want to verify a burn (and indeed, all burns should be checked, in some
form or other,) I simply do ddrescue /dev/dvd /dev/null and keep an eye
on the output.
If ddrescue reports any errors or 'rescued' sectors, then the disc is a
coaster. It's also useful to keep an eye on the kb/s as the disc is
read. This should start relatively small at the start of the disc, and
become much faster by the time you reach the outer edge. (on my
hardware, I go from 9000 KB/s at start to 17000 KB/s at end of DVD) If
you notice dips in the reading speed, that is an indication that the
drive had trouble reading some areas of the disc, even if it was able to
recover every byte with no error.
Re: Jaunty Jackalope (RESOLVED) by NoOp on
2009-11-03T19:13:36+00:00
On 11/03/2009 09:54 AM, Rashkae wrote:
> NoOp wrote:
>
>>
>> Yep. I was thinking about the CD issue (must have been a full moon out
>> last night).
>>
>>
>
> And for my part, I apologize for my first comment on this thread. While
> I certainly have never hesitated to jump into a cozy flameware, I mean
> no disrespect to you NoOp
None taken. Lists are good for keeping checks & balances, and I'm glad
you noticed that I was 180 out of wack :-)
I'll have to go back to my remedial reading class again, as I glazed
right over the part about hdd-usb-hdd & immediately thought of the CD
md5sum issue & it was a good reminder, to me, to always double-check
before offering advise.