Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Firon

µTorrent 1.7 beta 2951

Recommended Posts

UDP trackers will never be supported, and the low number of UDP trackers is continually dropping. It's a broken protocol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still, some problems in 1703:

1. when selecting pref.->downloads->don't start-the dl automatically - this did NOT effect the RSS auto-downloader, but only manual downloads . Seems that it is stopping auto-downloads now. should be fixed.

2. older bug - two RSS downloads with the same link in two feeds are both marked with blue "v" in releases when only one is downloaded.

BTW -

* an option can be added for the case that similar torrents are being detected in RSS with two trackers, to auto-add those trackers to the download

* a new filter/expression related to the torrent file download properties will be helpful (like smaller/greater/equal then XXX KBs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bug in all the betas: i have a PPPOE connection, if that gets disconnected, and my ip address changes when i get reconnected (and it always changes), most of the torrents don't work anymore. the error that i get when updating the tracker is "HTTP Error 404". i checked the websites and they all work. also, some require to visit the site if your ip changes and i made sure i did that, but the error persists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

404 error doesn't really have anything to do with µTorrent. :S

2) it SHOULD do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted a message on 05/05/07 explaining that When I downloaded uTorrent I thought that is was a simple program to download TV series! It appears that this site is much more than that, and is not what I am looking for.

I am trying to find the correct department that will help me terminate this program and hopefully refund my $35.00. It will should be apparent that I have never used the site except to contact someone at uTorrent to help me with this problem.

Thank you,

tony6274

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tony6274: Sorry but if you paid anything for µtorrent you have been scammed. µtorrent is 100% freeware. It's sad to read that this continues to happen. Those scammers should be shot.

By the way: On which webbpage did you purchase on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>hopefully refund my $35.00

LOL

btw build 1625 kept resetting my listen port to zero or some random number, build 1703 seems to be fine again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1703 beta seems to like to hang. Locked the client up completely and didn't respond to anything at all, couldn't get the tooltip from the tray icon or open the main window, or anything else for that matter (~40M memory footprint and 0% cpu usage, and apparently no fluctuation in either for the short period I bothered to observe it). Had to close it with ctrl-alt-del and restart (the client, not O/S) to get it working again. Will see if it'll lock up again, this didn't happen with 1625 or earlier (they just crashed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Fix: uTorrent continues normal startup if another uTorrent instance is detected and exits; previously it would inform the user uTorrent was already running and exit is very handy. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ rafi - regarding issue 2, the icons are that way by design. If you have two separate feeds pointing to the same URL, both torrents are the same, so downloading one should mark the other(s), much like how a browser will mark a link as visited. Does anyone else have any opinions regarding this behavior?

For issue 1, people were specifically requesting that RSS auto downloads respect the "don't start automatically" option... but we understand that some people may want different behavior for filtered/automatic downloads, so there should be an additional option in the next build for those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Richard Choi I agree with issue 1: An option for that would be nice. Also could you consider making utorrent remember the last selected Listview item (category list) ? As it is now utorrent forgets it and defaults to the "All" view at start-up. More.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>btw build 1625 kept resetting my listen port to zero or some random number, build 1703 seems

>to be fine again

nope, build 1703 likes to assign me random port :/

-run uttorent with listening port allready binded in other app

-utorrent will display "change listen port"

-go to options, look at listen port, say WTF because thers a big fat zero there

-click CANCEL to go out of options just to be sure you didnt confirm that zero

-exit utorrent

-run utorrent again, say WTF again because it just assigned random listen port number

of course "random listen port" option is disabled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@ rafi - regarding issue 2, the icons are that way by design. If you have two separate feeds pointing to the same URL, both torrents are the same, so downloading one should mark the other(s), much like how a browser will mark a link as visited. Does anyone else have any opinions regarding this behavior?

hmmm, it is somewhat logical.... my opinion - it should mark the one actually downloaded, if you would have also try to auto-add the trackers from all those identical ones, this would make more sense. not really a big deal.

edit: an idea - maybe use another icon color for duplicate links - like liter blue...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kokobaroko: 0 is random port assigned by the OS (guaranteed to not be taken by anything else)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ rafi - the "identical" ones in these cases would not have different trackers, as they would be pointing to the exact same .torrent file (not just a matching infohash, but the exact same file). Identical entries should not get checked unless they have both the same name and .torrent. If this is not what you're seeing in the latest build, please let us know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why whenever in the peers tab, when I press the '%' column, the little arrow points up, but the percentage complete goes in ascending order? And when I press it a 2nd time, the arrow points down, and it goes in descending order?

In 1.6 version, it used to be the other way around (arrow pointing up, but percentage complete goes descending, arrow pointing down, it goes in ascending order).

Why was this changed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the development is once again active I'll dare to make the ultimate request.

I'm aware that there are people against what I'm going to ask, but I believe that the request is legitimate and will come sooner or later: the possibility to prioritize the pieces within a file.

I know that for the best health of a torrent it's important that the swarm of pieces is well distributed but ultimately it's what is missing from current bittorrent clients to give users a complete control. I doubt this is a coding issue as Utorrent already allows to prioritize the first and last piece of a file, so the possibility to prioritize also other parts of a file is more of a choice than a coding limit.

That said, we already have the possibility to prioritize files within a torrent, so prioritizing single pieces wouldn't be catastrophic. It's a feature that stands on the same line, it's another option so that users can download with even more accuracy what they want. What I mean is that I doubt this "feature" will have a real negative impact overall, just a better service offered.

User-side it could be done through the "files" tab. As you do to highlight and select text on a web page, you could use the mouse to highlight and select a part of a file and have it prioritized.

If this is TABU I'd like to know the practical reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Firon

>kokobaroko: 0 is random port assigned by the OS (guaranteed to not be taken by anything

>else)

thats super, but as I said before I have utorrent set up on ONE particular port (31618) and dont want it changeed for me, utorrent build 1703 (and few earlier) goes berserk every time it cant bind that specific port, it decides FOR me and AGAINST me to flip to random port, why? t least build 1355 didnt do that ( cant check now, nowhere to download that build now)

I would understand that behaviour IF and only

-it would do than when it cant bind port only

-would NOT save that random port as the default listen port for me without my knowledge

-would display some dialog with info "cant bind port, choosing random"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not too knowledge about the protocol but as far as I understand it BitTorrent doesn't want the user to have complete control.

Prioritizing files is a lot more useful for the average user then prioritizing pieces. An average user shouldn't even care and know about pieces so why would we allow them to prioritize them.

The non-average user who does know about pieces knows its best for everyone to let the protocol do its thing.

How could pieces priority allow users to get what they want? A piece is a building block of the download chosen by the torrent maker program which has the sole purpose of making certain functionalities in distribution posible and efficient. It is not related to the end product (files) whatsoever. The only reason to influence piece priority is to try and adjust distribution efficiency which should just be left to the protocol.

So this 'feature' will have a negative impact, just like file priority. But unlike file priority the user doesn't get anything in return.

Or did I miss some advantage in allowing piece priority?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The non-average user who does know about pieces knows its best for everyone to let the protocol do its thing.

In fact it can be a custom option turned off by default. Its purpose is, in fact, limited. It wouldn't be hard to let users know that the option should be used with discretion and for what reason.

The only reason to influence piece priority is to try and adjust distribution efficiency which should just be left to the protocol.

Nope, it's undeniable that there are good and legitimate reasons to have this option. It's not to deliberately "sabotage" a torrent.

My idea is not to completely override the standard distribution. Just to select an area of a file and have it prioritized. This means that the standard distribution would still work, but instead of working on the whole file, it could work on just the first 100Mb, or whatever I select as the area to prioritize.

There ARE reasons and uses for such a feature. I may want to download just one part of a larger movie, or be able to preview a file, so requiring more pieces toward the end. I KNOW that previews can be done externally, but it's undeniable that many files don't have it and so the user may feel the need for such an option.

It's simple: if you don't think the option is useful then you don't use it, and make sure that it's disabled by default so that the users won't mess with it without knowing how it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bt.prio_first_last_piece is already in µTorrent under advanced settings, but it is so harmful that it is set to FALSE by default. It is a legacy holdover from days when more files could be previewed without modification.

Priortizing files in a multi-file torrent is also harmful to the torrent swarm and best done as a last resort. If too many people did it, then the whole system would nearly grind to a halt. If you've ever been on a torrent with 1 very slow seed and every peer at the same percentage, you'd understand a little better just how much harm this can cause. If even 1 person leaves before sharing out the extra piece they got, then everyone is set back potentially hours! And if the seed decides to leave after seeding only 1:1, then the torrent completely dies.

Getting a piece of a file is only useful if you can view/read/listen to that piece without downloading the whole. That generally requires editing or a special player that knows how to handle bad data. This is beyond the keen of the average torrent user IMO...unless they have a tool that does it all for them! There have already been recorded instances of media player programs "corrupting" torrents while downloading because they try to "repair" the unfinished torrent...meaning these files cannot be a true seed until the torrent is rechecked and missing/damaged parts downloaded again. (Or modifying MP3 tags in MP3/AVI/MPG files...causing even more havoc to the torrent swarm!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.