Fortunately I've got a special treatment for RARs. It's called 7zip; however, the RARs stay present on the system for the duration of seeding, which could be a year or longer.
But I do understand their benefit when using FTP.
Whoa
BT Rep: +19
Fortunately I've got a special treatment for RARs. It's called 7zip; however, the RARs stay present on the system for the duration of seeding, which could be a year or longer.
But I do understand their benefit when using FTP.
Notorious Pirate
BT Rep: +7
still no complaint about the way 0day releases are packed
that must be a real head turner
Damn, I Thought They Meant He Was An Actual Pirate.
Like with an eye patch and a peg leg.
Suit up!
No surprises.
BT Rep: +4
Not with Bittorrent.Originally Posted by lukee
they didn't built Rome in one day
BCG Owner
BT Rep: +45
Yes with Bittorrent.
i can tell you havnt read the entire thread.
Corruption, does happen with Bittorrent, we see it quite often actually.
just because it does not happen to you, does not mean it does not happen, ever.
Suit up!
It doesn't matter what protocol you are using. If the group badly packed the release you wouldnt have to redownload the entire file. if it got corrupted on your harddrive you'd have to redownload the whole file again. i just find it safer to use rars. The only thing i hate about the scne rules for packing is the 0day shit. Zip a rar file? fuck thats so stupid.Not with Bittorrent.
No surprises.
BT Rep: +4
I've read most of my thread, including your stories of how Bittorrent can corrupt files.
It's not right for everyone or every tracker, there will always be people who have their feet stuck in cement.
they didn't built Rome in one day
BCG Owner
BT Rep: +45
well i would much prefer to download a 50 meg rar again, than a 25 gig PS3 game ISO say. or a 50 gig Blue ray movie.
Poster
BT Rep: +2
rar files are very useful in newsgroup communities because they usually need to check the contents, but not that useful in bittorrent communities because bittorrent architecture already handle pieces. So, you are not saving any bandwidth when you download rar files and you don't need to redownload the whole file again if your client or system crashes.
The only thing which benefits users with rar files is the maximization of storage space.
deep funk
BT Rep: +5
if the release had been unpacked, tested and uploaded unrared there wouldn't have been a badly packed torrent on the tracker in the first place.It doesn't matter what protocol you are using. If the group badly packed the release you wouldnt have to redownload the entire file. if it got corrupted on your harddrive you'd have to redownload the whole file again. i just find it safer to use rars. The only thing i hate about the scne rules for packing is the 0day shit. Zip a rar file? fuck thats so stupid.
there would have been one unpacked repack version. one torrent less and a lot of saved bandwith.
your argument says rars make sense because rars might be uploaded corrupted which is kind of a contradiction. no rars on a tracker, no need for repacks on a tracker.
if you read the whole thread you'd see that rars are not needed for bittorrent because of the way the protocol handles files. chunks, checksums and verification are the keywords.
the only reason to tolerate them is faster pretimes and less work for the uploader.
it has nothing to do with errors whatsoever.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks