only alow files between a set size for filelist

Archived discussion about features (predating the use of Bugzilla as a bug and feature tracker)

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
majinsoftware
Posts: 17
Joined: 2003-09-08 02:53
Location: NZ
Contact:

only alow files between a set size for filelist

Post by majinsoftware » 2004-08-28 08:20

A good option would be to make a option where you can set a min and max size of files that get added to your filelist. This would filter out some of the junk files that are eather to small or to big to be in your file list. And save time if your shareing 1 of your whole hdds and dont want to go through all the files adding folder by folder. :D

TheParanoidOne
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1420
Joined: 2003-04-22 14:37

Post by TheParanoidOne » 2004-08-28 09:42

No. I don't see this happening.

Don't share any old rubbish. Sort through your share first.
The world is coming to an end. Please log off.

DC++ Guide | Words

majinsoftware
Posts: 17
Joined: 2003-09-08 02:53
Location: NZ
Contact:

Post by majinsoftware » 2004-08-28 19:23

yea every one should sort but it would make it easyer cos i share 3 games that are over the size that most public hubs allow EG *removed* .iso with this feature id just have to go in to settings and tick it. Other wise id have to untick my games folder which will corse me to lose 20GB off my share.

Xan1977
Forum Moderator
Posts: 627
Joined: 2003-06-05 20:15

Post by Xan1977 » 2004-08-28 19:45

majin, you've been around here long enough to know not to brag about sharing copyrighted material.

You can add it to bugzilla if you want, but seriously, this feature is never going to happen.

Lundis
Posts: 53
Joined: 2004-06-30 11:47

Post by Lundis » 2004-08-29 04:52

You wouldn't have this problem in the first place if you shared proper rar volumes.
http://www.omfg.se/whyrar/
Only download rar volumes and only share the rars.

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2004-08-29 06:11

"proper rar volumes"... yes please, let's bring up that old cure-it-all. Got any snake oil while you're at it?

PseudonympH
Forum Moderator
Posts: 366
Joined: 2004-03-06 02:46

Post by PseudonympH » 2004-08-29 13:20

One of these days I have to make a "why RAR is freaking retarded" site.

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2004-08-29 13:34


Lundis
Posts: 53
Joined: 2004-06-30 11:47

Post by Lundis » 2004-08-30 06:36

No snake oil but I have a cobra-like cat as you can see.
Look into the glowing eyes of the cobra........you are getting sleeeeeeepy.....repeat after me, rar is good, rar is good.

But I never said rar volumes would cure everything, only this particular problem where some hubs don't allow such large files.

I read that page about rar being bad, every point there was either lame or wrong. There wasn't much thought into that.

I re-read majinsoftware posts. He wanted to unshare his large files, but not loose 20 GB off his share. Maybe he had more than just large dvd-images in his games folder that he wants to keep, why can't you majinsoftware just put the dvd-images in a separate folder, then you will keep the other games of acceptable size in your share.
And this feature you requested, would that involve changing a setting so large files are unshared? Why is that better than unsharing the folder?

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2004-08-30 07:19

Lundis wrote:I read that page about rar being bad, every point there was either lame or wrong. There wasn't much thought into that.

"Lame" is very subjective. Which points were wrong exactly?

Lundis
Posts: 53
Joined: 2004-06-30 11:47

Post by Lundis » 2004-08-30 07:39

Yes, lame is subjective.

The wrong one is this:
2) The names make sense, the files are often renamed into something sensible.

In my experience, .bin files can often have the original names from the release groups and are very short. But they can be outside the original folder (which was well named), it makes them very hard to find on the first search. An auto-search or a TTH search usually finds them.
Other times they have other names that makes some sense and might be found by people.

But ALL extracted and renamed .bin and .iso files are definatley not well named. And "often" is not all the time, only with the new hashing will this be less of a problem.

However this is from my own experience and also a bit subjective.

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2004-08-30 07:53

So.. out of 8-9 points (which were originally all wrong or lame), you could (subjectively, by your own admission) specify one that might actually be wrong? Interesting.

Lundis
Posts: 53
Joined: 2004-06-30 11:47

Post by Lundis » 2004-08-30 10:54

Out of the 7 points, one wasn't correct in my opinion, the rest were technically correct but lame.
For example:
4) It also take less space on your filesystem due to dumbasses in release-groups have chosen to not use multiple of 1024 in sizes.
They must be reffering to slack in the drives clusters, everyone doesn't have 1024 in cluster size so it wont matter what they would chose. With some 30 rar files you get 30 half-used clusters, with a full file only one, still not important at all when we're talking about dvd-images.

And these:
5) You can refresh your share faster.
6) Your download-queue is smaller.
7) Your sharelist is smaller.
Oh my, this is the most important thing right now, especially since we're talking about several GB dvd images.

But don't think I'm a rar-junkie with a rar-only share. I have never downloaded a dvd image because fat32 can't extract them and I have no need for them. The rar volumes I do download tend to get extracted cause users prefer that.
I think that rar files are especially good for dvd images since it's more important to download from more users at once with such large files. That's still only possible with rar files. (and some special clients)

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2004-08-30 12:16

0. It uses up too much space to keep both the RAR-archives and the extracted files!
Very true. Not everyone has several GB's over to extract to.

0,5. Extracting an ordinary movie takes about 3 minutes and is very annoying.
Very true. DVD-r takes even longer.

1. Bin-Files functions and you don't need to worry about downloading incomplete rar-archives.
True. As long as you start your download from a complete source, DC++ will make sure the file is complete when you get it. I have never downloaded a corrupt cue/bin, but many corrupt rar's.

2. The names make sense, the files are often renamed into something sensible.
True. Just compare "smnh-lol.r01" to "Some movies name (lol).bin"

5. You can refresh your share faster.
Just ask fusbar.

6. Your sharelist is smaller.
With xml filelist this is about 40x times more true than before. It can be the difference between 1mb filelist and 30mb.

"Technically correct but lame", is that a different way to say, "you may be right.. but my dad has a bigger car than yours! na na na na!"? ;)

Locked