Hello,

This fucking feature will kill me some time. Or I will kill it.

Matthias, are you going to submit this change as a patch?

-Michael

> On 17 Sep 2022, at 11:28, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Confirmed. Somehow the name of the ISO has changed.
> 
> But - correct me if I'm wrong! - the naming of the ISO file takes place
> in '/usr/local/bin/backupiso':
> 
> Current is:
> ...
> ISO="ipfire-$IPFVER.$arch-full-core$COREVER.iso"
> ...
> 
> IMHO it could be sufficient to change this to:
> ...
> ISO="ipfire-$IPFVER-core$CORVER-$arch.iso"
> ...
> 
> I haven't searched for other occurences yet, but I think that could be
> the culprit...
> 
> jm2c
> 
> Matthias
> 
> On 16.09.2022 16:24, Adolf Belka wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> On 16/09/2022 16:02, Adolf Belka wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> 
>>> On the forum there have been a couple of people who tried creating an iso backup and it only showed a 0 byte file.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I have confirmed with my vm testbed. The same thing works fine for CU169.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> After looking through code I have found that Core Update 169  and 170 file name order is different. The arch is placed in a different location
>>> 
>>> 
>>> https://downloads.ipfire.org/releases/ipfire-2.x/2.27-core169/ipfire-2.27.x86_64-full-core169.iso
>>> 
>>> https://downloads.ipfire.org/releases/ipfire-2.x/2.27-core170/ipfire-2.27-core170-x86_64.iso
>>> 
>>> This means that backup.pl is not able to find the Core Update 170 iso from the downloads site.
>>> 
>> If the change in iso file naming convention was intended then backup.pl also needs to be modified for the iso naming convention.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Adolf.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Adolf.
>>> 
>>> 
>