Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
You probably just used the browser to download the iso images. You have just learned empiracally that http, the browser protocol is far from exact. When you download iso images or something you want to be exactly right use ftp, wget, rsync as your method of download. Browsers are convenient, but inaccurate. When you look at a web page, it doesn't matter too much. When you download software, accuracy is critical.
yes, but HTTP is [currently] built on top of TCP (OSI model ), which will assure we receive a verbatim copy of everything. Also, TCP uses a checksum, as does IP just below it. I don't see why ftp would be any different than HTTP. Does it implement yet another hash
HTTP and FTP both benefit from the error control built into the TCP protocol, in contrast to TFTP that uses UDP.
I would say that even though FTP was designed for files transfer HTTP is better. Why?
FTP rely on two network connections, one for data transfer and the other for commands to and from the server.
FTP support two modes, ASCII and binary. Sending anything other than a plain text file using ASCII will ruin the file without telling you.
All I can tell you is when I downloaded disks using http, I got very few correct md5sums. When I switched to ftp, wget, rsync or in the case of Debian jigdo-lite, I have never had a failed download. I have just downloaded all 14 sarge disks. All gave the correct md5sum.