Sha256sum and bad signature.

[mmah]

Hi all. Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match. Gpg verification reports "bad signature". Hopefully just a mixup. Needless to say but I won't be installing.

I was around when Mintlinux iso images were hacked some years ago so nice to see developers signing iso images. Many do not.

[AxL]

[....] Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match.

Well, it seems that what you say is completely FALSE.

As you can see in the attached images:







Since not only the sha256sum is totally correct. They are also md5sum, sha1sum and of course sha512sum.
So, stop spouting nonsense and deceiving other users with FUD & hoaxes.







Cheers !! 

[AxL]

[....] Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match.

By the way, the first images were from 'sourceforge.net' (Mirror 1).

And this one is from 'archive.org' (Mirror 2):





And, absolutely all checksums are also all correct.

[AxL]

[....]  Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match.

Notified the administrator with your lies and FUD .... 

[mmah]

Settle down big fellow. Sorry if I pissed in your cornflakes. I've downloaded the iso image,checksums, and signature again. Yes, sha256sum and signature match.

I'm assuming they were fixed in the last few hours. https://sourceforge.net/p/sparkylinux/activity/?page=0&limit=100#694eafad8cc2817262c63797

Thanks for the warm welcome.

[AxL]

[....]  I'm assuming they were fixed in the last few hours.

They haven't fixed anything, because NOTHING was incorrect, tolai.


The isos are exactly the same as the ones, I checked this morning (at 02:16:24 AM and 02:38:14 AM).
 As you can see in the links in these two images:







 Where all the checksums were absolutely correct.








FOPM