Fedora Unity release

Robert L Cochran cochranb at speakeasy.net
Sun Feb 17 15:17:00 UTC 2008

I think you have  bigger problem with jigdo than I do. Five days to get
Alpha 9? I got the whole thing in about 16 hours using jigdo. I thought
that was slow for a DVD, but it worked. Of course, now I need to
actually use Alpha 9. But I'm booked to the eyeballs for for the next
week and will be lucky to do this on Saturday.

Bob Cochran

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Kam Leo wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2008 6:05 PM, Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com> wrote:
>>> Does anyone have a bittorrent link for the Unity spins? I get 3-3.5Mbit
>>> speed with torrent, and 200-400Kbit with that jigdo thing. Last month I
>>> ran for five days and was still missing 27 parts, so it's kind of
>>> off my
>>> list of usefully fast methods, using no parallelism at all, and not
>>> letting users contribute to the supply.
>>> -- 
>>> Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
>> The torrent speed that you obtained must of happened within the first
>> month of the distro's availability. My past experience with Fedora
>> Unity is that not long after release there were too few clients to
>> make a torrent useful.  (Remember torrent clients only have to give
>> back 4 K-bits/sec of bandwidth ) You are better off using jigdo.
> The torrent speed was early last week, maybe the 12th, using a live CD
> boot on a Windows machine. Download of the original FC8 DVD iso image
> ran up to 385KB/s according to the NIC speed applet, average was about
> 320KB/s over the total download. Pulling 9Alpha1 (a) took five days to
> complete, (b) after day three I had to keep telling it to retry
> getting all the things it didn't get, and (c) I didn't contribute
> anything to the distribution, meaning that every client has to pull
> every byte from the server.
> I don't know where that 4K giveback comes from, maybe that's the
> lowest you can set or something, I normally set max_upload_rate to 400
> day and 800 night, so I don't impact outgoing bandwidth.
> I can't see any way I'm better using jigdo, slower for me and more
> bytes coming from the server... worst combination of features. See my
> earlier post this morning on comparing the methods. Jigdo may be a
> good way to create a new image when only a few bytes change, to get a
> full image it just does a poor job for both the client and server.

More information about the fedora-list mailing list