Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 00:17:49 -0500 From: Carleton Vaughn <keebler@mindspring.com> To: Joshua Tinnin <krinklyfig@spymac.com> Cc: Jason Henson <jason@ec.rr.com> Subject: Re: which bittorrent client Message-ID: <41F727FD.9040003@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <200501242329.52085.krinklyfig@spymac.com> References: <41F59C8B.1060308@fusemail.com> <1106633271l.27041l.1l@BARTON> <200501242329.52085.krinklyfig@spymac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. 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? -- Carleton Vaughn College Park, Georgia, USA
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41F727FD.9040003>