Jump to content

Talk:Shareaza: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 39: Line 39:
the website at www.shareaza.com has been non-functional for several days. is this software dead? 05:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
the website at www.shareaza.com has been non-functional for several days. is this software dead? 05:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


Not to my knowledge, the server is simply down (for over a week now). Strange though... while writing this, the project page at SourceForge is down this morning, but was up last night. Hmmm, not sure what is going on?
Not to my knowledge, the server is simply down (for over a week now). Strange though... while writing this, the project page at SourceForge is down this morning, but was up last night. Hmmm, not sure what is going on? [[User:24.11.243.33|24.11.243.33]] 12:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:38, 20 October 2007

WikiProject iconComputing B‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cleanup

I've tidied the article a little. The features list still needs completely rewritten. Chris Cunningham 22:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As does the Controversy section. It's unclear which bans are still in effect, which bugs persist, and someone has littered the section with justifiable {{fact}} templates. Also, the final para seems to imply that Kazaa Lite Pro is a version of Shareaza (?!?), which it certainly is not. 12.22.250.4 21:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's with all the Wikipedians?

Whenever I do a search on Shareaza, I get tons of results offered from people with usernames on Wikipedia. Has Shareaza all of a sudden become the favourite file-sharing tool of Wikipedians? -- Denelson83 20:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • If anything, I assume it's because many in the Shareaza community embraced Wikipedia fairly early on, like myself, rather than the reverse. I would assume that if you dig deep enough, you could find plenty of other p2p projects with authors on wikipedia. -FrYGuY 20:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's just spam. The spammers needed a list of believable names and apparently harvested Wikipedia for them. The spam should be blocked in the newer versions of Shareaza. --70.188.5.44 13:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge eTomi clone with Shareaza.

The eTomi article is small and repeats a lot of the information available in the Shareaza article. I think the articles could be merge with a section on eTomi and have eTomi redirect to Shareaza. Bpringlemeir 21:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how long was this in the article?? anyone editing using it??

Shareaza can not download the same file from several networks simultaneously. They have different hash systems for one thing. It can(like most protocols today) download from more than one source within one network. The different colours are not networks but just different users. --Echosmoke 01:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a former developer for Shareaza, I can authoritatively tell you you're wrong. Shareaza takes all the different networks hashes and uses them together. If it has the SHA1, BTIH, and ED2k hash of a single file, it can (and does) swarm between networks. Not to mention, if it only has an SHA1 Gnutella and Gnutella2 can cross swarm easily. -FrYGuY 03:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
well, i can see how it would be maybe possible in theory, but i ve never seen a download with sources from several networks. So now im trying some files that i would expect to be most likely candidates (the notorious linux/ubuntu e.g.) so far they all "split" completely to either G2 or edonkey. So do you have a file at hand to test it? Also, how do u resolve conflicts stemming from differing chunks? --Echosmoke 21:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, no, I don't, as my laptop now runs Linux thanks to some bad ATI drivers being installed by the Thinkpad update manager (Shareaza works under WINE, but not well), hence the reason why I'm a former developer. If you ask on the Shareaza forums, I'm sure they could recommend a few candidates with some magnets to boot. Conflicts are resolved by only using one of the hashes (the Tiger tree, as it's the most granular) to verify chunks, and the SHA1 to verify the file after completion. Please note that while it can swarm cross network, it does REQUIRE that the file is held by at least one Shareaza client, as otherwise there is no way to verify that a given SHA1 hash and ED2k hash represent the same file (It is still, to my knowledge, the only client which hashes every file with all the various required hashes and will transmit them), so it is not a feature which will always happen. With only an SHA1 hash, from a non-Shareaza client, however, downloading the file from both Gnutella and Gnutella2 is trivial, as that is the 'native' hash for both. In the download window, both networks are shown as Blue "HTTP transfers" rather than trying to figure out which network the other side actually represents (a pretty tough task, actually). Your task is also further hampered by the fact that ED2k and Gnutella have traditionally centered around different types of content (Larger files for ED2k, smaller for Gnutella), so the 'common files' of one network may be rare on the other and vice versa. Also, I'm not sure if this bug has been fixed, but at least it used to be that if you had a file with a few dozen Gnutella/G2 sources and a few thousand ED2k sources, the Gnutella side of the sources would be choked out and the sources eventually dropped (I never could figure out the reason, though I believe the leading candidate was that the HTTP sources were being timing out while the client was being overloaded with ED2k sources). But cross-network swarming is, in fact, possible. -FrYGuY 06:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]



shareaza dead?

the website at www.shareaza.com has been non-functional for several days. is this software dead? 05:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge, the server is simply down (for over a week now). Strange though... while writing this, the project page at SourceForge is down this morning, but was up last night. Hmmm, not sure what is going on? 24.11.243.33 12:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]