From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1E731382C5 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:46:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D7D2FE0875; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:46:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw2.antarean.org (gw2.antarean.org [141.105.125.208]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5AEE081E for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:46:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FvKKq28gbz8vVT for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 06:43:26 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from gw2.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gw2.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CnvXmOTIX-MT for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 06:40:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailstore1.adm.antarean.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FvKFP2f5cz8vVD for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 06:39:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailstore1.adm.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FvKJr5QRdz15 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 06:42:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from mailstore1.adm.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailstore1.adm.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pm0QtHD512hn for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 06:42:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from iris.localnet (iris.adm.antarean.org [10.55.16.47]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mailstore1.adm.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FvKJr3yTTzj for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 06:42:36 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=antarean.org; s=default; t=1622522556; bh=P84uxJVWDSaTTK6xCpUBcBWfsHmdER0m4myrWv4B+gU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=b5L/kDj4ZIS5f3wRqOD7f5PoLHqN93+yQtglsfB/f8/9iOp+WkqRKw7f905EUf/ql SlgmHVsSK2mHwI1TvmOudaG4zSiEwegBRR2WptGWLhP0TAd5BMw56/fY7bO960eedu cIn3EJqLLs33b+7RCIvlKvCuQot5AGxk4gAKkiO8= From: "J. Roeleveld" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] is "scp" reliable? Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 06:42:36 +0200 Message-ID: <2596776.mvXUDI8C0e@iris> In-Reply-To: References: <1eee5cf4-9234-07cf-4b83-7de431483d51@sys-concept.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archives-Salt: cbb8b9e3-f817-4ff9-8d93-d6134f54a47c X-Archives-Hash: 76702c1bd2c19348309b8851977d6525 On Saturday, May 29, 2021 11:04:44 PM CEST Mark Knecht wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 1:33 PM wrote: > > > > Another mystery. > > I copied the file to USB 1TB sandisk. > > md5sum check OK same as my computer > > > > > Different revisions of md5sum possibly? I have never had issues with different md5sum tools. I often use md5sum along with sha1sum to check file-integrity of downloaded files. The checksums being provided by the source. If there are differences, I would definitely suspect memory and CPU. -- Joost