Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 07:46:16 +0100 From: "Max Conrad" <max@zenplatypus.com> To: "'Joshua Tinnin'" <krinklyfig@spymac.com>, "'Carleton Vaughn'" <keebler@mindspring.com> Cc: 'Jason Henson' <jason@ec.rr.com> Subject: RE: which bittorrent client Message-ID: <20050126064552.F18C743D1D@mx1.FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200501252225.45581.krinklyfig@spymac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Settle down, Joshua. -----Original Message----- From: Joshua Tinnin [mailto:krinklyfig@spymac.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 7:26 AM To: Carleton Vaughn Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Jason Henson Subject: Re: which bittorrent client On Tuesday 25 January 2005 09:17 pm, Carleton Vaughn <keebler@mindspring.com> wrote: > Joshua Tinnin wrote: > > On Monday 24 January 2005 10:07 pm, Jason Henson <jason@ec.rr.com> > > > > wrote: > >>On 01/24/05 20:10:35, Brian John wrote: > >>>Hello, > >>>I would like some advice on which Bittorrent client to use. I > >>>really like Azureus, but I always get OutOfMemoryException's and > >>>it takes up like 300 MB of memory sometimes. Is there a more > >>>lightweight client that has the main features of Azureus > >>>(priorities, auto-resuming)? What does everyone on this list use? > >>> > >>>Thanks! > >> > >> py24-BitTorrent-devel-3.9.0_4,1 Is what I have. seems to work > >> fine for me. > > > > I highly recommend ctorrent, a client written entirely in C. It's > > very fast, small and efficient. It's quite basic - you have to run a > > separate process for each torrent - but you can call it from > > something else to further customize it. It doesn't do priorities as > > such (not exactly - you can set max, min peers, rate, etc., for each > > torrent) or auto-resume, but this could be set fairly easily by > > writing it into a script. The best thing is that it just works, and > > as efficiently as possible. > > I also use ctorrent, but I had a couple of problems with it: First, > like you said, it wants separate processes for each torrent. Easily > solved using screen (which I rebuild from the port as the binary kept > trying to eat 99.1% of my CPU time). Second, the default set of > listen ports (2106 to 2706) seems not to match those of anybody else, > which meant that every tracker I went to designated me a leech and my > downloads positively crawled. I went into the source and changed the > port range to the more universally accepted 6881 to 6999 and > everything runs very well now. That's a good point, but I almost never use 6881 anymore, as many ISPs have blocked it. My firewall will forward requests, but I set it up manually anyway. > This does raise a question, though---what is the best way to modify a > port to suit your own needs? Can it be done through ports itself, or > does one need to do what I did and copy the source elsewhere, modify > it and install it from there? What you can do is do make extract in the port folder, modify the source and/or Makefile (making sure to save backups of the originals), then make the diffs for future reference or to do a make patch. If you just need these changes locally then that's all you have to do, and you can hold a port through /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf so it won't upgrade unless you force it. If your changes help the port work better, you can always submit them though send-pr. If you do that you should read up in the handbook about how to do it, and this article is also helpful: http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2001/01/25/Big_Scary_Daemons.html - jt _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050126064552.F18C743D1D>