Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I have downloaded the torrent file, but what do I execute to grab the DVD?
Thanks, great effort CentOS Team.
Jerry
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Jerry Geis geisj@pagestation.com wrote:
Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I have downloaded the torrent file, but what do I execute to grab the DVD?
Thanks, great effort CentOS Team.
Jerry _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
you need a bittorrent client to grab the DVD try: yum install azureus after that open the .torrent file using azureus and start downloading it, then when you finish burn it on a DVD and boot from it
Jerry Geis wrote:
Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I have downloaded the torrent file, but what do I execute to grab the DVD?
you need a torrent application, such as ctorrent or rtorrent for linux, or utorrent for windows, and you need an open port from outside, almost any high port will do (if you are behind a NAT firewall, 'forward' this port to the torrent machine, and configure the torrent program to use that same port). then; feed the torrent program the .torrent file, and kick back and let it work.
its good manners to let the torrent 'seed' at least twice the size of the torrent before shutting it down. if your bandwidth is highly asymmetric (like ADSL or Cable), configure the torrent program to limit its outbound to about 80% of your connections total outbound capacity, and this will hugely smooth things (torrent has a habit of jamming pipes so hard you can't get anything else done).
I used Azureus. Worked fine. The image'll be used for new installs, for already installed machines yum update works faster.
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Geis Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 6:58 PM To: CentOS ML Subject: [CentOS] bittorrent
Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I have downloaded the torrent file, but what do I execute to grab the DVD?
Thanks, great effort CentOS Team.
Jerry _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Jerry Geis wrote:
Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I have downloaded the torrent file, but what do I execute to grab the DVD?
You can download the dvd-iso (http/ftp) from a mirror-site. Have a look at: http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=13
Regards
Lars
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 12:58 -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I use the rtorrent from rpmforge. Enable that repo and then yum install rtorrent. It's a lean, mean CLI machine! :-)
AND HURRY UP! My new "fat" pipe (potential 1.25MB/sec) has finally edged up to 85.5KB/sec. I need the help folks! ;-)
I have downloaded the torrent file, but what do I execute to grab the DVD?
Thanks, great effort CentOS Team.
Ditto.
BTW: here's a rtorrent command line if you decide on it.
#!/bin/bash export SD=~/../shared/CentOS cd $SD rtorrent \ -s $SD \ -o check_hash=no,key_layout=qwerty \ -o peer_exchange=yes,dht=on \ *.torrent
The "peer_ex..." is useless here as this is not a private torrent. You can drop it. Also, if you don't have multiple torrents, the last line is OK. Otherwise you can drop it and use <ALT><Backspace> with tab completion to selectively enable the ones you want to process.
Jerry
<snip sig stuff>
Happy torrenting!
HTH
On Tuesday 24 June 2008 12:20:23 pm William L. Maltby wrote:
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 12:58 -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
Looks the only way now to grab a DVD is by torrent.
What is the yum install XXXX name to get it on the machine?
I use the rtorrent from rpmforge. Enable that repo and then yum install rtorrent. It's a lean, mean CLI machine! :-)
AND HURRY UP! My new "fat" pipe (potential 1.25MB/sec) has finally edged up to 85.5KB/sec. I need the help folks! ;-)
<SNIP>
BTW: here's a rtorrent command line if you decide on it.
#!/bin/bash export SD=~/../shared/CentOS cd $SD rtorrent \ -s $SD \ -o check_hash=no,key_layout=qwerty \ -o peer_exchange=yes,dht=on \ *.torrent
Here is something that might help...
http://compnetworking.about.com/od/bittorrent/qt/bittorrentports.htm
William L. Maltby wrote:
AND HURRY UP! My new "fat" pipe (potential 1.25MB/sec) has finally edged up to 85.5KB/sec. I need the help folks! ;-)
Is that for uplink or downlink ? if you are downloading at 85k/sec there is something wrong with your setup, I can saturage a 100mbps link with the torrent with no problem ( there is atleast > 600mbps on offer for the i386 DVD at the moment ).
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 00:16 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
AND HURRY UP! My new "fat" pipe (potential 1.25MB/sec) has finally edged up to 85.5KB/sec. I need the help folks! ;-)
Is that for uplink or downlink ? if you are downloading at 85k/sec there is something wrong with your setup, I can saturage a 100mbps link with the torrent with no problem ( there is atleast > 600mbps on offer for the i386 DVD at the moment ).
Downlink. I didn't think anything was wrong with my setup. On non-torrent downloads I get a very good rate.
I suspected it was because I was "late to the show" and had just fired it up. Somehow, the *real* announcement got by me in the clutter from the false announcements from the unwashed masses. After I saw enough posts making it look like an announcement had been made, I fired it up. As it takes a little while for the torrent to discover enough peers, I figured that was the reason.
Hmmm... But you might have something there. Maybe the fact that I started one via the command line and the other through the UI? It prompted me to go looking. The 1to6 zipped right along and is done. I noticed that it had peer connections 8 of 8 from very early in its lifetime while the DVD had 0 of 8 and has never gone above that.
I think I'll kill DVD and restart it. No help. Stop 1to6 upload restart the whole shebang. Crap. Peers around 50. Inching up slowly, 71, 81, 88, 96... going back down... Now up to 133KB, 145, ... got as high as 545KB.
Oh well. Must be something about the DVD version. I do see that the 1to6 had peers active. DVD ha{s,d} inactive.
After reviewing the man pages again (the upmteenth time), no help.
On 6/25/08, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
After reviewing the man pages again (the upmteenth time), no help.
might the default upload/download rate limits be bringing you down ? iirc, almost all BT clients have some limit or the other... rtorrent perhaps does not.
- KB
I presume that as you have 1.25MB/s then you aren't on a T1 but are on dsl. Maybe your ISP is "shaping" your traffic for you you could run tcpdump for a short while and look for resets or window size fluctuating suggesting artificial congestion
i know that using torrents has become problematic since my isp was bought by one of the bigger players in the UK who seem to think that all torrent traffic is there to be throttled irrespective of whether it is legitimate
bad business model massively overselling bandwidth
mike
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 12:54 +0100, Michael Simpson wrote:
On 6/25/08, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
<snip>
might the default upload/download rate limits be bringing you down ? iirc, almost all BT clients have some limit or the other... rtorrent perhaps does not.
- KB
I presume that as you have 1.25MB/s then you aren't on a T1 but are on dsl.
Nope. Cable (RoadRunner Turbo at home - competitive pressures forced a recent speed increase by Time-Warner).
Maybe your ISP is "shaping" your traffic for you you could run tcpdump for a short while and look for resets or window size fluctuating suggesting artificial congestion
I always keep a watch for such things. But I know this is not the case as I upgraded 5.1->5.2 on one node while I was downloading the images on another so that I could later seed for others. During that time, the aggregate between the two nodes was as expected.
Besides, TWC knows not to mess with me! ;-) I recently reported a problem in their network that they couldn't fix for three months (typical CPE fault viewpoint I presume). I told them their net was broken and which nodes. Sure enough, we finally got to a total outage and when it was fixed, so was my problem. Anyway, one of their "causes" was that I had upload 27GB that week (actually, I'd been doing it for several months - they hadn't noticed so it likely was not the cause). I reminded them that the upload speed was sold to me and was mine to use, with due consideration. And being in the boonies, my contention is low.
In their follow up survey about customer satisfaction, I did lay a few choice words on them and offered that not all their users were TDUs (Typical Dumb Users).
i know that using torrents has become problematic since my isp was bought by one of the bigger players in the UK who seem to think that all torrent traffic is there to be throttled irrespective of whether it is legitimate
I hear that Comcast over here tried that too. I can't recall if it got canned or not. There are more rumblings about others doing that too. I have no problem (as I told TWC) if it is done *as_necessary* to provide equitable access to all. I told them that software was sophisticated enough to do it as needed only.
bad business model massively overselling bandwidth
That's expected. Like politicians, we can't expect a profit driven business to tell us the truth, live within their means or keep their word. Plus, marketing at TWC is careless, or ignorant, about distinguishing between Kb and KB.
mike
<snip sig stuff>
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 12:35 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
After reviewing the man pages again (the upmteenth time), no help.
might the default upload/download rate limits be bringing you down ? iirc, almost all BT clients have some limit or the other... rtorrent perhaps does not.
Nope. It's got a default of no throttle. I forget the default rates, if any, but I always adjust both up/down to the max I can stand (without choking other apps/nodes in my local net).
E.g. I had down at 2000KB. After I restarted, running only the DVD, it did better. However, now that I am seed, I won't be able to see much else on the download side.
Peers is still inactive when it should be 8/8 (which rtorrent also allows to be increased).
I think there may be something about the DVD torrent. After my post last evening, I went to eat dinner, sleep, etc., leaving things running. Speed must have picked up as the 1to6 was done and seeding this A.M.
But the DVD was still crawling.
As mentioned, it did pick up when I restarted and is now seeding. But info shows peers inactive.
I'm almost sure this has something to do with it. With peer_exchange enabled and dht enabled, I ought to be seeing something different.
- KB
<snip>
Thanks for trying to help out!
I'll continue to seed for a couple weeks.
-
Bassel Safadi -
centos＠atempleton.net -
Jerry Geis -
John R Pierce -
Karanbir Singh -
Lars Schelde -
Michael Simpson -
Sorin Srbu -
William L. Maltby