which bittorrent client

Max Conrad max at zenplatypus.com
Tue Jan 25 22:45:53 PST 2005


Settle down, Joshua. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Joshua Tinnin [mailto:krinklyfig at spymac.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 7:26 AM
To: Carleton Vaughn
Cc: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org; Jason Henson
Subject: Re: which bittorrent client

On Tuesday 25 January 2005 09:17 pm, Carleton Vaughn
<keebler at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Joshua Tinnin wrote:
> > On Monday 24 January 2005 10:07 pm, Jason Henson <jason at 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 at freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"




More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list