Archived

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

AdamK

µTorrent 3.4 RC

Recommended Posts

There seems to be a problem with the versions available on the alpha download link.

It took many refreshes of the download page to get finally get 30193. (I was getting older versions - 30137, 30168, 30175).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There seems to be no way to get rid of the "featured torrent" bar despite repeatedly clicking the X on it.

To turn off all ad related and featured content:

Options>preferences>Advanced...

Turn all these settings to false:

left_rail_offer

gui.show_plus_upsell

sponsored_torrent_offer_enabled

bt.enable_pulse

gui.show_notorrents_node

offers.content_offer_autoexec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the User Manual .....

Enabling this option effects ratings, and disables comments too.

'effects' should be 'affects'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
µTorrent alpha 3.4 build 30219 is now available for download...No changelog.

I guess this is not official till Adam says it is... :P

New version - Changelog is up

-- 2013-10-04: Version 3.4 (build 30193)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

µTorrent beta 3.4 build 30226 (1.21 MB) is now available for download...No changelog.

*Still useless with no UTP connections when seeding!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've updated to last beta, and the number of torrents are of each label (the number in brackets aside the labels) always appear 1, but I've several torrents in each label. Why always apeear 1 althoug add or delete torrents?. :(

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/9503/ysku.png

P.S.: As screen capture is too big, do not embedded this in the message, put the link directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This version uses double digit cpu usage. The stable version uses last than 1%. Any way I can help track down this bug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Still useless with no UTP connections when seeding!

http://www.imagebam.com/image/372310281870334

http://www.imagebam.com/image/7aec85281870332

What makes you say that? Screenshot? Did you make sure uTP is enabled? Tried resetting your bt.transp_disposition? things get corrupted after years of abuse, you know...

number of torrents are of each label (the number in brackets aside the labels) always appear 1

Confirmed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This version uses double digit cpu usage. The stable version uses last than 1%. Any way I can help track down this bug.

High cpu usage as compared to stable

Bad icon in tray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What makes you say that?

No UTP data transfers when seeding only (download complete) since build 29336 on numerous tested torrents.

All other releases (3.2.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2 up to 3.4 build 29336) and before the "Bound listening socket" entries in the log work as it should as far as Utp is concerned.

Utp is enabled in settings and yes tried resetting bt.transp_disposition by starting with a fresh settings.dat many times.

Here are examples of seeding with 2 different torrent files.

vz0acK8.jpg

FvB9B2f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Got to laugh!

Laugh away... Sadly, you don't get it. Yours is an insignificant edge case, rarely noticeable. Thus - low priority. This here is a broken feature. any *regular* label from 3.3.2 is simply *not being counted" at all. This is a major issue, high proprity. Did you get it this time?... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you don't consider that the two are SYMPTOMS of possibly the same coding error?

The visible effects of any erroneous condition are symptoms NOT the cause!!!

Do you now get why I report what YOU think is insignificant? ANYTHING that shouldn't happen is indicative of a deeper underlying problem, whether it be in human beings or software. To draw an anology, having a 'mole' appear on your arm might be insignificant, but on the other hand it might just be an early indicator of a melanoma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the same coding error?

Who cares. Report whatever you want. Sadly, as it is, only more significant issues has a chance to be fixed...

At this point, I'd guess that the completely revised Labels engine in 3.4 has something to do with the broken feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man you need to take off those blinkers and join the real world of programming where ANYTHING that should not happen IS a case for concern and EVERY symptom can take one nearer to the root cause.

Share this post


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