From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas F Herbert Subject: Re: snapshot for 2.2.0 problem? Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 17:28:33 -0500 Message-ID: <56C8E891.6060907@redhat.com> References: <56C77084.6090901@redhat.com> <56C85B99.5060700@6wind.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: Vincent JARDIN , "users@dpdk.org" Return-path: Received: from mail-qg0-f46.google.com (mail-qg0-f46.google.com [209.85.192.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28714C60C for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2016 23:28:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id b35so87386747qge.0 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2016 14:28:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56C85B99.5060700@6wind.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 2/20/16 7:27 AM, Vincent JARDIN wrote: > Thomas, > >> I am not sure if anyone has noticed yet this but is the dpdk snapshot >> bad today? > > can you check again? Its fixed. Thanks much! I forgot to mention but I had found the problem yesterday in integration build of ovs-opnfv. > > For 2 download: > > $ md5sum dpdk-2.2.0*gz > 22e2fd68cd5504f43fe9a5a6fd6dd938 dpdk-2.2.0 (1).tar.gz > 22e2fd68cd5504f43fe9a5a6fd6dd938 dpdk-2.2.0.tar.gz > > tar tvzf is ok too. > > Thanks for the notice, > Vincent >