fragglet: Spanning RAR idiocy

fragglet (

fragglet) wrote,
@ 2005-11-17 23:25:00

Spanning RAR idiocy
As a user of BitTorrent, I commonly find torrents which turn out to be a collection of spanning RAR files containing the actual files I want. There is absolutely no reason for doing this, it is irritating, inefficient and wasteful.

I have recently seen this site being used to promote the use of spanning RAR files in torrents. In defence of the site, it is concerned with DC++, not Bittorrent, but I feel I should dissect some of the claims on this site to explain exactly why none of the arguments presented on it are relevant arguments to Bittorrent users.

The site claims:

Original-releases are archived rips of movies, programs, games and music - all released by organisations and groups specialized in creating these kinds of releases, so called releasegroups. An example of these are DEViANCE, ViTE, LOL, RNS. The advantage of downloading these releses is that you know exactly what you are getting instead of downloading an .avi-file which someone-who-doesn't-know-what-they-are-doing put together. In addition, all release-groups follow a common set of rules which they together have created - rules that contribute to maintain high quality releases!

Admittedly, rips from groups of people experienced in doing such things are likely to be better than other releases. However, merely seeing that a torrent contains a collection of spanning RAR files does not prove that it has been released by any of these groups. Anyone can upload a poorly-ripped movie and claim to be a member of a release group. The fact that a file is contained within a spanning RAR file has no bearing on the quality of the file itself.

A better solution to guarantee a file comes from a well-known group would be to digitally sign the released files, and present torrents of the files and the signatures.

1. Because the releases consists of small parts you don't have to worry about re-downloading the whole release if something goes wrong and a file gets corrupted.

BitTorrent does not download files sequentially, but in parallel. It is impossible to guarantee that any file in a torrent has completed downloading until the torrent as a whole has completed. BitTorrent detects and recovers from data corruption.

2. You can control that everything has been downloaded correctly by checking against the SFV-file. Hence you will always know whether you've gotten a complete uncorrupt release of what you were downloading.

This means that you will have the exact same files on your computer, when you've downloaded and extracted the release, as the person who first ripped the movie and created the release. This instead of downloading an extracted version of the file which perhaps has been transfered a couple of hundred times from one person to another and where there is an overwhelming risk of transfer errors. This doesn't mean that the file won't work, but it can lead to colourdeviations or so called freeze-frames.

BitTorrent includes built-in hash checking of all files, effectively making downloading errors impossible. It even recovers from errors if a block is not downloaded properly. This is redundant.

You cannot guarantee that you have the same file as the person who did the rip, as anyone can modify the file and create a new SFV file with the modified hash. As mentioned already, digital signing would prevent this.

3. You can download from multiple sources at the same time - ensuring comformt and maximizing your download speed.

BitTorrent inherently downloads from multiple sources. That is how it works. Unless people start setting up multiple torrents for each spanning RAR file in the set, this is redundant.

4. We ge a standardized way of sharing, which DC obviously benefits greatly from. You will learn to recognize a good release and be spared the inconvenient trouble/surprise of poorly ripped movies by amatures.

This is an argument for this system's use on DC and does not really apply to BitTorrent. Most BitTorrent tracker websites already have comment and rating systems to rate downloads. Again, panning RAR files do not guarantee quality or originality.

One argument which does not seem to be presented on this page is that release groups somehow "own" their releases and that people should respect the release groups by not modifying "their" releases. As these releases are usually of copyrighted material anyway, this argument is obviously patently absurd.

The case against spanning RAR files

Due to Information entropy, placing movies inside RAR files will actually make them bigger - the files are already compressed and can't be compressed again!
Most "releases" of this kind include redundant files - "sample" clips, for example. You can't watch the sample clip until the entire torrent has downloaded anyway, so it is pointless to include it.
It is a waste of both time and hard drive space - I must spend time extracting the file, after which I now have the same information on my disk twice!

In summary, the use of spanning RAR files is a hangover from older systems such as Usenet and (possibly) DC++ where breaking releases into multiple files helped protect against failed downloads. The architecture of BitTorrent makes doing so redundant and unnecessary. Furthermore, doing so does not guarantee originality or quality in any way. What it does do is increase the time it takes to download a file.

(48 comments) - (Post a new comment)

	u n00b (Anonymous) 2005-11-18 02:13 pm UTC (link)
	maybe simply they cant be arsed 2 unrar then seed when u can just as easily do it ? (Reply to this)

	the_ophiolater 2005-11-18 02:23 pm UTC (link)
	Have you considered purchasing the copyright materials from the legal owner, rather than complaining that others don't facilitate your theft as conveniently as they might? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	no fragglet 2005-11-18 02:28 pm UTC (link)
	no (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: no
(Anonymous)
2005-11-18 02:48 pm UTC (link)

I´m sorry to break it for you, but you are simply retarded. Users of BitComet can indeed downlad only the sample of a file and check the quality, because thats WHY samples are included. The rar´s are no guarantee that the file is real or good, but thats why you have nforce.nl . This site lists all releases and nukes them (disapproves) if they are bad. So take your dick out of your own ass and stop complaining.
Jerk..

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: no
(Anonymous)
2006-01-07 07:29 pm UTC (link)

hey fragglet, I'm honored that you've taken the time to comment on my guide (whyrar). It was interesting reading and I must say you are correct in almost everything you say. On bittorrent many of my arguments become redundant as you say. However, the advantage of the standardized way of sharing should not be underestimated.

I find the standard of naming and information files very valuable on bittorrent too. Although the cutting in rar-files becomes unnecessary on bittorent, many use multiple filesharing protocols, including DC, in which the "downloading from multiple sources" benefit people that want to download from you.

About the sfv-files it is also redundant on DC now, since DC++ has implementet a system of file hashes and automatic checking of file integrity.

The main reason to why I download and share original releases myself is that I always know what I get. I know how to recognize good releases and I always have all the information I need. Sure, a "good release" could easily be "faked", but why would someone go through the trouble? And even if someone did, they would be quickly removed from the server in question.

My biggest trouble when downloading from bittorrent is that the files are named "Lord of the Ring.avi" etc. Why would I download that avi when there next to it is an original release named Lord.of.the.Rings.The.Two.Towers.DVDRip.XviD-ViTE"?

Again, thanks for your time!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: no

fragglet
2006-02-01 01:27 pm UTC (link)

Hi, thanks for taking the time to write a coherent and logical reply to my post. To answer some of your points:

I do not disagree with the use of standard naming schemes for releases. I agree that this is useful. I myself go for the releases made by well known teams.

It seems perfectly believable that someone would try to fake a release and impersonate a well-known team. For example, someone new to the "scene" might do so in order to increase the number of people downloading their release. Or a group might post bad quality rips in the name of another group in an attempt to slander it.

The point I'm making is this: people should extract the actual AVI when posting a torrent of it, rather than posting the RARred version. Posting the RAR version is bad from a technical point of view (for the reasons I've already listed).

Some people claim that getting the RAR version is useful because it ensures you're getting the "original release" (although this is clearly not the case). If, as you suggest, nobody would go to the trouble of faking a release, then this is not an issue either.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: no
(Anonymous)
2006-02-07 05:06 pm UTC (link)

Hey again!
[people should extract the actual AVI when posting a torrent of it] - I would agree to this if people only used bittorrent. But they don't, atleast not the ppl I know. They use BitTorrent, DC, FTP and other more primitive means that don't have the error detection and correction that bittorrent has. Therefore I think the benefits of having the original release for future sharing outweight the negative things it brings on bittorrent.

[Some people claim that getting the RAR version is useful because it ensures you're getting the "original release"] - well, ensures is probably an overstatement, but it certainly helps.

I feel that the possibility that someone simply renames an avi-file and claims that it's from a known group is much higher than someone going trough the trouble of faking an entire release. Either way, both of these users would be swamped with bad reviews and probably thrown out from the server if they keep the faking up. So ppl faking releases is really not a big issue, 99% of the time you can trust the naming.

To clarify, the bittorrent system iself don't need original releases. I agree. But for the share-chain not to fail later on. Original releaes is needed.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Mein Eyes! (Anonymous) 2005-11-18 02:45 pm UTC (link)
	Simon, can you get rid of the Ronald McDonald colour scheme so I don't wish to rip my eyeballs out? - Afterglow (Reply to this)

	mikej_uk 2005-11-18 03:35 pm UTC (link)
	So few posts, and then WHAM! (Reply to this)

from Jon^D
(Anonymous)
2005-11-18 03:51 pm UTC (link)

you can tell your bittorrent client to assign a higher priority to one file in a set of files inside the torrent.

You may download a file from more than one method. E.g., you might fetch as much of a RAR-set as possible from usenet, where you may get the highest speeds, and then finish it off with a torrent of the rarset.

do you have stats on the compression ratio used for spanned-rarsets? It may be near 0. For usenet, it's a convenient way of splitting a file up for windows-people, who don't have 'split' like loonix does.

(Reply to this)

	Jesus christ dude (Anonymous) 2005-11-19 12:40 am UTC (link)
	You've got the totally wrong idea. The groups doesn't make the releases for bittorrent kiddies such as yourself. It's a great security risk to put them on P2P networks, but still someone does it. You should be grateful that you're even allowed to decompress the files. (Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Jesus christ dude
(Anonymous)
2005-11-19 01:14 am UTC (link)

They don't make releases for us? Sounds like a weak excuse for crap work to me.

And we should be grateful? Grateful for what exactly, having to fuck around with a million pointless rar files because all the incompetent warez scene morons don't understand how computers work? Everytime I download a rar-ed bittorrent I curse the greasy little braindead shits who made it, is that gratitude enough for you?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Jesus christ dude (Anonymous) 2005-11-29 01:39 pm UTC (link)
	"You should be grateful that you're even allowed to decompress the files." big thanks to brain damaged distributors, I obey you Happier now? (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2005-11-19 12:43 am UTC (link)

Do you really think that ripping groups PLAN TO RELEASE their work on bittorrent???? NO THEY DON'T. Everything is sent over FTP, NOT BitTorrent. When using FTP you can get files from different servers at once, use a second thread to boost your speed and so on. You, sir, have completely wandered off about this matter. You should gather some information before posting crap like this.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2005-11-29 01:41 pm UTC (link)
	But what is the point of putting the RAR'ed files on BT? I think that is the question, not what the ultra cool scene people send back and forth between their FTP's. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2005-11-19 05:19 am UTC (link)

what he's getting at, I think, is that people shouldn't upload the rars to BT. forget about the misonception that may alie on warez crews relation to bt (or rather lack of relation). it's not directed at the groups, more the people.

And fraggle: one argument for keeping it rar all the way is that the files then go elsewhere. and pollute. how could you possibly counter that? it's a matter of value really, how important you think it is with the quant quality on a whole. And take note that i'm on your side. I dont care if someone gets an out of synch copy, or even if I do once in a while, from downloading on a p2p network. But this argument isn't even relevant since the groups dont care jack about bt, as stated.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	exactly! (Anonymous) 2005-11-21 09:04 pm UTC (link)
	You nailed it. there's no reason at all for using spanned rars in a torrent. A single rar for a torrent is acceptable for compression, but with bittorrent you're just making smalller pieces of small pieces. It doesn't bother me that much, it's the same old command whether it's spanned or not: unrar x *.rar (Reply to this) (Parent)

Get with the program dude..
(Anonymous)
2005-11-19 06:33 am UTC (link)

You all have to excuse Fragglet for not knowing what he is talking about..
He apparently just started to use his mom’s computer and thinks torrent is the first and only way to share files..
One of my old geezer nerds took me down memory lane when I asked why some (smaller) releases was rared and then zipped before released:

"In the beginning, rar did the best compression job, and zip had more error correction capabilities..
And when you tried to un-archive a multivolume rar, and you got an error, you couldn't see what volume that was bad..

Rar files also gave more faulty downloads than zip, don't ask me why...
But a faulty download was more of a fuzz when you had 28.8 modems than it is now.

And some ftp sites had scripts that zipped the files automatically when uploaded.

The way they compress releases hasn't changed since then, but the connection speed and error correction has.

ISO releases are almost always only rar files nowadays though..."

Major groups are now starting to request us NOT to spread their releases on P2P networks in their nfo's.. That's a result of the disrespect they get from the new generation of leechers.
But if you still think .nfo is a strange system file you probably won't know what happened until its too late.

So please, with sugar on the top, Fragglet, get with the program! These groups know what they are doing and are not on a personal war with you.
/M

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Get with the program dude.. (Anonymous) 2005-11-19 01:12 pm UTC (link)
	No, he uses YOUR moms computer, after he's used her. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Get with the program dude..
(Anonymous)
2005-11-21 10:03 pm UTC (link)

Yea, i once thought that these multiple rar files were useless until i realised that they do ALOT much more than just cause the user trouble. You can easilly download them from FTP or places such as DCC++, then if someone already uploaded the torrent, you can easilly hop on and start helping seed.

Not only this but if a single .rar file turns out to be corrupted, the uploader can simply re-upload that damaged .rar file instead of having to upload the ENTIRE video again.

It may not happen often, but it happens enough to make them alittle bit usefull. If you dont have a good enough computer to decompress them quickly, then buy a new computer. It shouldnt cause you ANY trouble.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Get with the program dude..
(Anonymous)
2005-11-21 10:07 pm UTC (link)

YOU sir are the god damn moron. Before you go spouting stupid shit at people you don't know, examine what he's really saying. First off, he has never once implicated that there's a "personal war" anywhere. The entire god damn point of the article is that he's merely venting his frustration with this concept of spanned rar sets over bt. Is he not allowed to do that? You and so many others in this comment thread have been real assholes when you totally miss the point. Nothing he's stated in this article is false really. Don't come up here acting like you know a thing or two because you downloaded harry potter all by yourself. Fraggle is a LONG time, experienced programmer/linux nut/computer user extraordinare, and if you think MY comments were harsh, try reading some of the bullshit your colleagues have spewed out.

Also, while the origin of the practice is sound and it makes sense why it's done on other places, it has no place in the BT system. However, considering some take newsgroup releases and pop them on a tracker, AND considering it really is the same whether it be 1 rar or 30, it's not that big of a deal. But as I said before, he's not WRONG.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Get with the program dude.. (Anonymous) 2005-11-22 06:06 am UTC (link)
	Fragglet is allowed to be as frustrated as he wants.. And we are allowed to mock his attempt to convert the scene to fit his beliefs.. He might have been an experienced programmer/linux nut/computer user extraordinaire since I sucked my mom's tit for what I care.. But that doesn't change the honor codex and rules of the scene, does it..? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Get with the program dude.. the_ophiolater 2006-01-09 02:34 am UTC (link)
	"Honor codex"? LOLMAO. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Get with the program dude.. the_ophiolater 2006-01-09 02:13 am UTC (link)
	"In the beginning..."? If that's the beginning, then I invented information theory. Oh wait...CLAUDE SHANNON INVENTED INFORMATION THEORY AND YOUR ALLEGED OLD TIMER STILL ISN'T SHAVING. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Get with the program dude..

the_ophiolater
2006-01-09 02:48 am UTC (link)

What actually happened was that Fragglet was cloning Doom on the Internet while you were still doing a limited number of hobbies in your underwear on the floor of your mummy's bedroom.

Furthermore, I can speculate that you have no understanding of how these systems work if you claim that "rar did the best compression job", "zip had more error correction capabilities", but you cannot explain why "Rar files also gave more faulty downloads than zip".

So, go read a book or something, read about yourself, learn your culture - you're blind baby, blind!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2005-11-24 09:53 am UTC (link)

I agree with you,

fragglet, distributing RAR files on BT is retarded. Not only are the resultant files larger, they also have to be un-rarred before you can view them, which means that if you want to continue seeding while you watch, you have to store two copies. This discourages seeding for extended periods of time.

Perhaps this is one reason why they use RAR... They don't like BitTorrent and they want to discourage distribution over it. After all, why would anyone seed the precious NFO file, when the AVI has the goodies?

However, fuck that. If you're pirating stuff, don't complain if other pirates pirate what you just pirated. Jesus, who do you think you are? The MPAA?

And if you're seeding a RAR on BitTorrent, it is in your interest to extract it first. That way, your torrent will last longer, because (a) it is smaller, and (b) people can seed it and view at the same time, without needing extra disk space.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

You are perfectly right there..
(Anonymous)
2005-11-24 01:13 pm UTC (link)

They do not like BitTorrents and the public P2P, that's why more releases state:
1) Unrar and Burn or mount using Daemon/Alcohol 120%
2) IF A PC User ... see notes below. Otherwise Install it!
3) Enjoy!
4) Buy it if you use it!
5) Do not spread this to P2P networks. This is for scene use only!

And what are "notes below"? It could be anything from serial numbers to vital information like:
"Unpack, burn, install and use TMG's keygen to generate a Product Key. Now -- DISABLE YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION! -- Go to product activation and select - activate now, skip registration - it will complain that it can't connect to the symantec servers..... press next until you reach the retry screen & select activate my software by phone. Use TMGs uberelite keygen once more to get your final unlock code!"
But who needs to know all that?
The scene doesn't release just Tv-rips and movies, you know that..
But they will go back to private FTP's, IRC-channels and DC-hubs (where they initially are released and intended to stay).
So we should all kiss their smelly feet for spending time cracking, hacking, ripping, packing and releasing all this material for no reason at all except for the respect and glory..
And don't blame the scene because you don't have enough disc space on your hard drive to unpack stuff..

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Using BT and DC++ simultaneously (Anonymous) 2005-11-24 11:18 am UTC (link)
	One thing that isn't mentioned here is that many users, like myself, use both BT and DC++ simultaneously. That is, I download a movie with BT and if I like it I put it in my DC++ folder for sharing. Then it's convenient to have RAR-ed files in BT too, and I think that's worth the extra minute that the extracting before viewing takes. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Using BT and DC++ simultaneously (Anonymous) 2005-11-24 12:35 pm UTC (link)
	If you're using DC-clients like Valknut (http://dcgui.berlios.de/) you can download one file from multiple sources at the same time, with multi-/chunkdownload. This also goes for some FTP-programs. (Reply to this) (Parent)

rar spanning
(Anonymous)
2005-11-24 12:54 pm UTC (link)

let me explain it again

PIRACY IS AGAINST THE LAW

RELEASE GROUPS FACE PROSECUTION (time in side has been given before for one group)

DO NOT BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOUR GREEDY UNGREATFUL MOUTH

We put releases in RAR files to make it easier for US to do what WE do. We do not need and should not be expected to explain this too you.

The scene is alot bigger and deeper than you leeching whinning twats realise.

Any of you even know what a multi-dump multi-group FXP release race is? There can be no race without split files. Races are one of the things that keep the 0day scene alive and fun. without the 0day scene it would be months before you idiots got new games movies etc.

ANYWAY

STOP COMPLAINING AND ENJOY THE FILES. COMPLAIN IF THEY ARE BROKEN OR SHIT QUALITY

DON'T COMPLAIN AT A FEW EXTRA CLICKS YOU TWAT

also, you say that anyone can make a new set of rar's with SFV, we beg to differ. we get loads of people trying to join our group. alot fuck it up all the time, so we never give them membership, they are also the ones who make shit rips too..... go figure

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: rar spanning mc17 2005-11-24 06:30 pm UTC (link)
	word. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: rar spanning the_ophiolater 2006-01-09 02:16 am UTC (link)
	So, to summarise: Piracy is against the law, and we should think that people who do it are cool, and are extra cool for using FTP. Right. Got that. Presumably "the scene" is still "hanging" with FTP because client-server is more "underground"? (Reply to this) (Parent)

responding to some of the comments here

fragglet
2005-11-24 04:07 pm UTC (link)

Thanks to all of the people who have replied to this post. I'd just like to clarify that my only complaint is with the use of spanning RAR files when downloading from BitTorrent. I have no issue with the use of RAR files on other file sharing systems, or by "the scene" or release groups. I totally understand that it is necessary or useful when using some other systems.

What I am saying is this: RARed releases should be unpacked before releasing onto BitTorrent. There is no need at all to keep it inside a RAR.

The fact that most of the "criticism" of my post has taken the form of flames and personal insults has only served to confirm my suspicions that most of the people promoting the "RAR approach" are simply a bunch of elitists who are unable to properly defend it or provide any justification for it from a technical point of view.

I will concede one point: it is possible to download individual files from torrents. I was not previously aware of this as I use the official BitTorrent client which does not offer this feature. You could conceivably use this feature to download different RARs from different file sharing systems. However, how many people actually do this? I'd guess one in 10,000, and even then only occasionally. I don't think that it is worth inconveniencing everyone with increased download times just for what 0.01% of users might conceivably want to do.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: responding to some of the comments here (Anonymous) 2005-11-24 04:43 pm UTC (link)
	Kiss my spotty ass, you faggot. Stop complaining. Nobody gives a shit about what some BT kiddie wants. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: responding to some of the comments here (Anonymous) 2005-11-27 04:31 am UTC (link)
	Oh what a mature little 'scene' wannabe you are... (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: responding to some of the comments here (Anonymous) 2005-11-29 01:44 pm UTC (link)
	... and his point is proven once again, jerk. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: responding to some of the comments here (Anonymous) 2006-01-04 10:52 pm UTC (link)
	Kiss my spotty ass, you faggot. I believe you are the one telling the man to place his lips on your buttocks, good sir. - Afterglow (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: responding to some of the comments here the_ophiolater 2006-01-09 02:19 am UTC (link)
	I don't think we know that Mr. Anonymous thinks that there is anything wrong with homosexuality. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: responding to some of the comments here
(Anonymous)
2005-11-24 05:50 pm UTC (link)

Your position is entirely reasonable. Different file formats for different networks! Spanning RAR's good for FTP, but not for BitTorrent. End of story. Given the level of personal remarks that have been made, I thought I should post again in support of you.

I think it's just sad that loads of wannabe-1337 kiddies felt the need to disagree so nastily, ironically acting as if they had the right to distribute the RAR files in the first place! How strange to hear pirates complain about piracy. Why don't you guys do what you're always telling the (MP|RI)AA to do, and change your business model? If you want the credits for your ripping work, and I agree that you do deserve them, then you need to make sure that they will either survive repacking, or that your work does not need repacking in the first place.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

sharing is caring
(Anonymous)
2005-11-24 10:10 pm UTC (link)

OK. I'm a n00b, but I wanna say this: thanks to all nice ppl out there sharing all good stuff for free! if that means I have to learn (as I had to!) how to unRAR, read nfo's, apply cracks, create virtual drives, mount, etc, that's OK with me! I even admit that I have liked those little challenges. for me it's a bit puzzling to read all the flaming comments, hey, we're all doing the good thing, as Sharing is Caring.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: sharing is caring the_ophiolater 2006-01-09 02:20 am UTC (link)
	Hello Tall Mario. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: sharing is caring
(Anonymous)
2007-08-30 06:43 am UTC (link)

OK. I'm a n00b, but I wanna say this: thanks to all nice ppl out there sharing all good stuff for free!

Based on the shitty attitudes from scene kiddies in the thread, you're wasting your thanks. They're doing it for some personal reason and want everyone else to go fuck themselves. Which would be a bit easier to respect if it wasn't piracy we were talking about. The proprietary attitude, about how they package and redistribute someone else's hard work for free, would be hilarious if it were any less pathetic.

It's absolutely as ethical to complain about how unfit their methods are for bittorrent (which is what the entire world outside of the mom's basement scene uses), as it is for them to leech (pirate) the stuff in the first place. Fuck 'em, unrar and rehost what they put out. Just because the kids on the short bus rip the stuff, doesn't mean everyone else has to ride it when downloading.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	parity files (Anonymous) 2005-12-19 11:11 am UTC (link)
	i thought i would just add that nobody has mentioned parity files yet, which are really useful when downloading from usenet, where it all started. thankyou. -- t money (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Don't need rar with BT (Anonymous) 2006-01-19 11:00 am UTC (link)
	the point ? = bittorrent file sharing networks DO NOT need rar packaging, they are a waste of every machine's processor power, in DC++ i totally agree to rar, simply because it is faster... and btw, flaming is something I did in my kindergarten years : ( (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Spanning RAR (Anonymous) 2006-01-26 02:13 am UTC (link)
	I have downloaded a movie and am stuck on 99.8%. The one file that is not finished is r15. Can i just download that file from a different place and insert it into the folder in place of that one then extract and burn or will that not work? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Spanning RAR fragglet 2006-02-01 01:14 pm UTC (link)
	The answer is yes; however, are you actually using Bittorrent? BT usually downloads across all files at once. If you are using BT, it is rather unlikely that only one file would be incomplete. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Spanning RAR 3_and_1_half 2006-02-07 11:08 pm UTC (link)
	Or, you could just go into the folder you saved the file in and delete it, then start your torrent again. It should re-download the file. That's the way I learned it, even though I haven't had to do it yet. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Spanning RAR (Anonymous) 2007-10-09 10:11 pm UTC (link)
	Erm, if the problem is no seeders, or no seeders for the particular chunk of data that is missing, deleting files is counter-productive. I have heard of bittorrent client bugs causing hang ups, particularly when the seeder changes the files after seeding (editing ID3 tags etc.), maybe this cures that situation. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(48 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

The case against spanning RAR files

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs