gnome-btdownload is dire

[bored2k]

Will McCutchen Wrote: 
> > 1. It doesn't have the new file selector.
> > 2. It doens't resume properly. If you click stop then resume, it'll
> > simply delete all of your file and start again. Not good at all.
> > 3. It has very poor download speeds - with gnome-btdownload I
> couldn't
> > reach 20kbyte/sec. On the exact same file with Azureus (which is so
> > much nicer) I was eaisly getting 55kbyte/sec. Obviously this could
> > just be a coincidence, but I did it for 3 files, and very similar
> > problems.
> > 4. It doesn't handle multiple torrents. It also doesn't save your
> > settings, so you have to set your upload speed every single time.
> 
> Take a look at Avalanche as an alternative to gnome-bt:
> http://idontsmoke.co.uk/2004/avalanche/
> 
> It was written to try to fix its author's nitpicks about gnome-bt,
> most of which (the nitpicks) you seem to share.  Note, though, that it
> too uses the original BitTorrent codebase, so any speed/port problems
> you are having might persist.
> 
> It's a little rough around the edges, but so far I prefer it to
> gnome-bt.  If you like Azureus, though, Avalanche might seem far to
> simple to you.  Personally, I find Azureus a little bit overwhelming;
> it's like BitTorrent infoporn.
> 
> 
> Will.
> 
> -- 
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
The question of the day: can it be trusted? I too dislike Azureus and
use the ugly bittornado-gui, but at least it works flawlessly. I have
several gygabyte downloads and I would go berserk if they didn't resume
or something weird like gnome-bt does.


-- 
bored2k